Blanck

Blanck v. Hager

Good Law
220 F. App'x 697
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 16, 2007No. 05-15606California543 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Blanck appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment on his First Amendment retaliation claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and his tortious discharge claim under Nevada state law against Superintendent Hager and the Washoe County School District (“District”). He also challenges the district court’s denial of his motion for a continuance under Rule 56(f).

As to Blanck’s § 1983 claim, we reject his arguments that because of the nature of his conduct the “policymaker” or “confidential employee” exception of Branti v. Finkel, 445 U.S. 507 , 100 S.Ct. 1287 , 63 L.Ed.2d 574 (1980), cannot be applied to him, and that this court limits the exception to claims involving discharges based on political expression. See Hobler v. Brueher, 325 F.3d 1145, 1149 (9th Cir.2003); Walker v. City of Lakewood, 272 F.3d 1114, 1132 (9th Cir.2001); Biggs v. Best, Best & Krieger, 189 F.3d 989, 996 (9th Cir.1999).

Furthermore, although the district court held that Blanck, as a matter of law, is a “policymaking or confidential employee,” on appeal he only challenges the determination that he is a policymaker. Because Blanck has failed in both his opening and reply brief to challenge the…

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.