Consolino v. Towne

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff-employee’s section 1983 action alleging that defendant violated his First Amendment rights by denying his request for transfer to FBI in retaliation for plaintiff testifying on behalf of his wife in her arbitration that accused defendant of Shakman violation. Plaintiff’s supervisors denied any knowledge that plaintiff had testified in wife’s arbitration, and plaintiff’s contention in his affidavit that said supervisors “would know” of every case in which defendant had been accused of Shakman violation was insufficient to create triable case on said issue. Ct. also rejected on factual basis plaintiff’s claim that one supervisor gave conflicting statements regarding his knowledge of plaintiff’s testimony at wife’s arbitration, and plaintiff otherwise failed to show that one supervisor had any personal involvement in decision to deny his transfer request, which precluded plaintiff from establishing any section 1983 claim against him.