Gerberry

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiff Chris Gerberry appeals the district court’s denial of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim, and the defendants appeal the court’s decision that Gerberry was wrongfully terminated under A.R.S. § 23-1501(3)(c)(ii). We affirm in part and reverse in part. Because the district court found that Gerberry would have been terminated for a non-retaliatory reason even in the absence of the protected conduct, Gerberry’s claim must fail under either statute.

A § 1983 employment termination claim cannot succeed if the plaintiff-employee would have been terminated for a legitimate reason anyway. See Gilbrook v. City of Westminster, 177 F.3d 839, 853-55 (9th Cir.1999) (“[I]f both legitimate and illegitimate motives may have played a part in an adverse employment action, the ultimate inquiry is whether the employer ‘would have reached the same decision as to [the plaintiffs] [] employment even in the absence of the protected conduct.” ’) (alteration in original) (quoting Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 287 , 97 S.Ct. 568 , 50 L.Ed.2d 471 (1977)). Gerberry argues that the defendants’ proffered reasons for his termination were sufficiently…