Amanda Culbertson v. Pat Lykos
790 F.3d 608
| 5th Cir. | 2015Background
- Plaintiffs Amanda Culbertson and Jorge Wong were certified technical supervisors who left HPD in 2011 and were hired by Lone Star College, which held a long-standing contract with Harris County to provide oversight of breath-alcohol-testing (BAT) vans.
- Both had raised concerns about BAT-van equipment reliability; Culbertson later testified in court (some testimony after resigning) and both were quoted in newspaper articles criticizing the program.
- Assistant DA Rachel Palmer and DA Pat Lykos allegedly sought to discredit the plaintiffs, recommended that Harris County contract with DPS instead of Lone Star, and informed the County/Commissioners Court that Culbertson and Wong were not credible witnesses.
- Harris County’s Commissioners Court approved budgetary action awarding the BAT contract to DPS; Lone Star thereafter terminated Culbertson and Wong.
- Plaintiffs sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (First Amendment retaliation), and asserted state-law tort claims (tortious interference). The district court dismissed all claims and awarded Palmer attorneys’ fees under the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA).
- The Fifth Circuit reversed in part and remanded: it reinstated municipal-retaliation claims tied to the Commissioners Court’s contract decision and the tortious-interference-with-contract claim against Palmer, reversed the TCPA dismissal and fee award, but affirmed dismissal of individual-capacity First Amendment claims against Palmer based on qualified immunity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs state First Amendment retaliation claims for speech as public employees/governmental contractors | Speech about BAT reliability was a matter of public concern and motivated County action to transfer the contract, causing plaintiffs' job loss | Defendants contend much speech occurred after HPD employment (not protected or was part of job duties), and any action was by Lone Star/County independent of prosecutors | Court: Some First Amendment claims plausible (speech by contractors/public-employee framework applies); claims tied to County’s nonrenewal survive pleading stage; other speech-based claims dismissed for lack of constitutional theory or factual support |
| Whether Harris County is liable under Monell for cancelling Lone Star contract (ratification/custom) | County ratified or rubber-stamped DA/ADAs recommendations; Commissioners Court acted with knowledge of improper motives | County argued decision was independent, Lone Star terminated employment (attenuation), and no municipal policy/custom alleged | Court: Plausible ratification alleged as to Commissioners Court approval of recommendation and reasoning; Monell municipal claim as to County survives at pleading stage; de facto widespread-policy claim fails (no pattern alleged) |
| Individual liability and immunity for Assistant DA Palmer (prosecutorial/qualified immunity) | Plaintiffs allege Palmer led campaign to discredit and remove them, causing employment harm | Palmer asserts absolute prosecutorial immunity or, at minimum, qualified immunity for recommending nonuse and advising decision-makers | Court: Declined to decide absolute immunity; held qualified immunity bars individual-capacity § 1983 claims because law was not clearly established that a non-final-decisionmaker recommending action could be liable; individual-capacity claims dismissed |
| Applicability of TCPA and award of attorneys’ fees to Palmer; state tort claims (tortious interference) | Plaintiffs: TCPA should not apply; tortious-interference claims are valid against Palmer for causing termination | Palmer moved under TCPA and sought fees; she also argued insufficiency of tort pleadings | Court: TCPA dismissal improper because Palmer denied making the communications and offered no evidence beyond plaintiffs’ allegations; fee award reversed. Tortious-interference-with-contract claim against Palmer plausibly pleaded and survives; tortious-interference-with-prospective-relations fails (no specific prospective relationships alleged). |
Key Cases Cited
- Kinney v. Weaver, 367 F.3d 337 (5th Cir. 2004) (framework applying public-employee First Amendment analysis to governmental-contractor instructors)
- Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006) (no First Amendment protection for speech made pursuant to official duties)
- Umbehr v. United States, 518 U.S. 668 (1996) (government-contractor speech analyzed under public-employee framework)
- Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) (absolute prosecutorial immunity for prosecutorial acts in judicial process)
- Monell v. Dep’t of Social Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability requires policy/custom causally linked to constitutional violation)
- Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469 (1986) (single municipal policymaker decision can establish policy for § 1983 liability)
- Beattie v. Madison Cnty. Sch. Dist., 254 F.3d 595 (5th Cir. 2001) (ratification and causation in nonrenewal context; limits on liability for non-final decisionmakers)
- Jett v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 491 U.S. 701 (1989) (municipal liability and causation principles for school-district employment decisions)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (pleading must state plausible claim)