Cromwell v. City of Momence

Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing for failure to state cause of action plaintiff-police officer’s section 1983 action alleging that defendant terminated him from his position without providing plaintiff with due process. Defendant’s regulations applicable to police officers did not contain clear promise of continued employment in absence of cause for termination needed to overcome presumption of at-will employment, and fact that regulations did not provide that non-probationary officers (such as plaintiff) could be fired at any time was insufficient to establish that plaintiff had protected contractual right to continued employment for purposes of his due process claim. Moreover, Ct. noted that instant regulations did not preclude defendant from terminating employees for legitimate non-cause reasons that would not subject employee to discipline.