Ulrey v. Reichart

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff-assistant principal’s section 1983 action, alleging that defendant violated her First Amendment rights by retaliating against her for complaining about supervisor’s decision on student discipline issue and violated her due process rights by coercing her resignation. Record showed that plaintiff registered her complaint in her status as employee, as opposed to private citizen, because subject matter of complaint fell within her official duties, and thus First Amendment did not protect her speech. Also, plaintiff failed to establish any due process claim, even though she had protected interest in her continued employment, because employee who resigns and relinquishes her interest in continued employment may not complain about lack of due process. Moreover, although plaintiff could prevail if she showed that her resignation had been involuntary, plaintiff did not show that she had been subjected to constructive discharge, where supervisor merely asked for her resignation, or that her resignation had been coerced, since supervisor, at best, only threatened to fire her.