Freeman v. Sansom, 24-668

Lisa Freeman, a former officer of the East Hartford Police Department (EHPD), sued Scott Sansom (the former Chief of Police), alleging gender discrimination in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
Freeman claimed she was fired because of her sex, while Sansom argued he had just cause for the termination.
Sansom moved for summary judgment, asserting qualified immunity.
The District Court denied summary judgment, finding genuine disputes of material fact as to whether gender discrimination was a but-for cause of Freeman’s termination.
Sansom appealed the denial of qualified immunity on interlocutory review.
The Second Circuit dismissed the appeal, holding it lacked jurisdiction as Sansom challenged factual findings rather than presenting pure questions of law.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Sansom is entitled to qualified immunity	Disputed facts preclude summary judgment	Facts show no clearly established violation	Appeal dismissed—no jurisdiction
Whether gender was a but-for cause of termination	There is a genuine factual dispute	No evidence sex was a but-for cause; relied on SBMA	Genuine issue precludes summary judgment
Whether comparators are similarly situated	Male officers engaged in similar conduct	Comparators not similarly situated	Factual issue; district court’s finding stands
Effect of State Board of Mediation/Arbitration (SBMA)	Decision not binding, factual dispute	SBMA ruling shows just cause, no discrimination	Not binding; factual dispute remains

Soukaneh v. Andrzejewski, 112 F.4th 107 (2d Cir. 2024) (Interlocutory qualified immunity appeals are limited to pure legal questions, not disputed facts)
Jok v. City of Burlington, 96 F.4th 291 (2d Cir. 2024) (Court cannot reach merits on interlocutory appeal if factual disputes remain)
Salim v. Proulx, 93 F.3d 86 (2d Cir. 1996) (Appellate review of denial of qualified immunity barred where facts are disputed)