Curtis Sherrod v. Dr. Arthur Johnson
667 F.3d 1359
11th Cir.2012Background
- Sherrod, a public high school history teacher, claimed termination was retaliation for First Amendment speech.
- Johnson was Superintendent of Schools and Crutchfield was Principal of Roosevelt Middle School where Sherrod worked when terminated.
- Beginning in 2001, Sherrod criticized the District for not complying with a statute requiring infusion of African/African-American history.
- After an unsatisfactory May 2002 evaluation, Sherrod was placed on a remedial plan and transferred to multiple schools during 2002–2004.
- In fall 2003 he was transferred to Roosevelt Middle School; Crutchfield received parent complaints about workload and deviations from curriculum and gave an unsatisfactory evaluation.
- On February–May 2004, Crutchfield recommended termination, Johnson adopted the recommendation, and the School Board terminated Sherrod; ALJ later approved, then Florida Fourth DCA remanded, but federal action proceeded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qualified immunity applies to retaliation claim | Sherrod argues termination violated clearly established rights. | Johnson/Crutchfield acted with lawful, discretionary authority. | Yes; qualified immunity applies. |
| Record shows lawful, non-pretextual reasons for termination | Defendants lacked legitimate basis to terminate for protected speech. | Record shows unsatisfactory evaluations and violations of curriculum controls. | Yes; immunity intact given lawful reasons. |
Key Cases Cited
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (Supreme Court 1982) (established qualified immunity framework for public officials)
- Lassiter v. Alabama A&M Univ. Bd. of Trustees, 28 F.3d 1146 (11th Cir. 1994) (concrete and factually defined context required for clearly established law)
- Mt. Healthy City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (Supreme Court 1979) (mixed motives may be lawful; motive impact on liability varies)
- Foy v. Holston, 94 F.3d 1528 (11th Cir. 1996) (presence of mixed motives does not automatically defeat immunity)
- Stanley v. City of Dalton, 219 F.3d 1280 (11th Cir. 2000) (interlocutory appeal of denial of qualified immunity)