Karl

Karl v. City of Mountlake Terrace

Good Law
678 F.3d 1062·2012 WL 1592181·33 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1415·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9311
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 8, 201211-35343California5,623 words

Opinion

Opinion

Koh, J.

Defendant Charles “Pete” Caw (“Caw”), Assistant Chief of Police in the City of Mountlake Terrace Police Department, appeals from the denial of qualified immunity in Plaintiff Martha Karl’s (“Karl”) 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging First Amendment retaliation. The district court held it was clearly established in December 2008 that a supervisor cannot retaliate against a public employee for his or her subpoenaed deposition testimony offered as a citizen in the context of a civil rights lawsuit. We affirm.

I. Background

Karl began working for the City of Mountlake Terrace Police Department (“Police Department”) in April 2003 as the Confidential Administrative Assistant to the Chief of Police, who at that time was Scott Smith (“Smith”). Her job duties were primarily clerical and included processing time cards, attending and taking minutes at meetings, organizing trainings, answering the phone, and photocopying.

In 2008, Karl was subpoenaed to give deposition testimony in a federal civil rights suit filed by former Police Department employee Sgt. Jonathan Wender (‘Wender”) against the City of Mountlake Terrace (the “City”), Smith, and others. Wender’s lawsuit was brought…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.