ILNews

7th Circuit: No First Amendment rights violation

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld summary judgment in favor of a northern Indiana school board regarding prior restraint and First Amendment retaliation claims made by a teacher.

In Gregory G. Samuelson v. LaPorte Community School Board, et al., No. 06-4351, Gregory Samuelson filed an action under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 against his employer LaPorte Community School Corporation (LSC), alleging violations of the First and 14th Amendments, and the Indiana Constitution, following his removal by the school board as coach of the girls' varsity basketball team.

Samuelson claimed his contract as coach was not renewed because he publicly expressed his views about issues relating to the school without following the school's bylaws for chain-of-command policy.

Both parties filed for summary judgment on the claims; Samuelson's response abandoned his 14th Amendment and Indiana Constitution violation claims. The U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, granted summary judgment in favor of the school corporation.

The 7th Circuit affirmed the ruling, finding Samuelson's First Amendment rights were not violated because the school corporation's chain-of-command policy doesn't constitute prior restraint because it doesn't restrict speech protected by the First Amendment. The speech addressed in the policy is speech grounded in the public employee's professional duties and is not protected, wrote Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook.

Samuelson couldn't present concrete evidence to show his contract as basketball coach wasn't renewed as a result of his circumventing the chain-of-command policy on various school-related issues, so summary judgment on his claim in favor of LSC was correct, wrote Chief Judge Easterbrook.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Contact Lea Shelemey attorney in porter county Indiana. She just helped us win our case...she is awesome...

  2. We won!!!! It was a long expensive battle but we did it. I just wanted people to know it is possible. And if someone can point me I. The right direction to help change the way the courts look as grandparents as only grandparents. The courts assume the parent does what is in the best interest of the child...and the court is wrong. A lot of the time it is spite and vindictiveness that separates grandparents and grandchildren. It should not have been this long and hard and expensive...Something needs to change...

  3. Typo on # of Indiana counties

  4. The Supreme Court is very proud that they are Giving a billion dollar public company from Texas who owns Odyssey a statewide monopoly which consultants have said is not unnecessary but worse they have already cost Hoosiers well over $100 MILLION, costing tens of millions every year and Odyssey is still not connected statewide which is in violation of state law. The Supreme Court is using taxpayer money and Odyssey to compete against a Hoosier company who has the only system in Indiana that is connected statewide and still has 40 of the 82 counties despite the massive spending and unnecessary attacks

  5. Here's a recent resource regarding steps that should be taken for removal from the IN sex offender registry. I haven't found anything as comprehensive as of yet. Hopefully this is helpful - http://www.chjrlaw.com/removal-indiana-sex-offender-registry/

ADVERTISEMENT