695 F.3d 807
8th Cir.2012Background
- Buehrle alleged retaliation for exercising free speech, age discrimination under MHRA and ADEA, and retaliation under Missouri Workers’ Compensation Act; the district court granted summary judgment for the City.
- Buehrle’s employment history includes roles as patrol officer, sergeant, and special investigator, with key events in 2005–2009 affecting promotions and assignments.
- In 2007–2009, Buehrle faced disciplinary actions, a shift to less desirable hours, and denials of promotions to sergeant (ultimately awarded during suit).
- A 2008 light-duty policy change and alleged misapplication of the policy affected Buehrle’s light-duty opportunities.
- The district court held no First Amendment protection for Buehrle’s Board of Alderman report because it was made pursuant to his official duties; MHRA/ADEA claims lacked pretext; and the Workers’ Compensation retaliation claim failed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the speech was protected under the First Amendment. | Buehrle spoke as a citizen on public concerns. | Speech was pursuant to official duties, not protected. | Speech was not protected; district court affirmed. |
| Whether MHRA age discrimination was shown as a contributing factor in 2009 promotions. | Age contributed to the denial of promotion. | No evidence age factored into the decision. | No contributing factor; MHRA claim fails. |
| Whether ADEA but-for causation is shown. | Age was the basis for adverse actions. | No but-for evidence of age discrimination. | ADEA claim fails; no but-for causation. |
| Whether the Missouri Workers’ Compensation Act retaliation claim survives. | Adverse actions were tied to filing a workers’ comp claim. | Admission showed actions were not exclusively due to the claim. | Claim rejected; summary judgment for City affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (U.S. 2006) (speech made pursuant to official duties not protected)
- McGee v. Pub. Water Supply Dist. #2, 471 F.3d 918 (8th Cir. 2006) (public employee speech on public concerns)
- Baker v. Silver Oak Senior Living Mgmt. Co., 581 F.3d 684 (8th Cir. 2012) (MHRA and ADEA standards differ in emphasis)
- Daugherty v. City of Maryland Heights, 231 S.W.3d 814 (Mo. 2007) (MHRA age discrimination standard for contributing factor)
- Gross v. FBL Fin. Serv., Inc., 557 U.S. 167 (U.S. 2009) (ADEA requires but-for causation)