Peter Paske, Jr. v. Joel Fitzgerald
785 F.3d 977
| 5th Cir. | 2015Background
- Paske, a white sergeant in the Missouri City Police Department, clashed with Chief Fitzgerald (black) after Fitzgerald hired Merritt (black) and denied Paske captain promotions.
- Funeral leave for Merritt in July 2011 prompted a lackluster investigation and no formal discipline for misleading leave requests.
- Merritt requested a voluntary demotion to lieutenant; rumors of her misrepresentation circulated; Paske questioned Merritt’s demotion at a COMPSTAT meeting.
- Paske was suspended, then demoted to patrol after a Punishment Meeting, and Merritt imposed a Performance Improvement Plan on Paske, including an EAP and drug testing.
- Paske feared drug testing results would be falsified; he refused to comply with an immediate drug test and was terminated the same day.
- Paske filed federal and state claims; district court granted summary judgment to the Government on federal claims and remanded state-law claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Paske spoke as a citizen or employee for First Amendment purposes | Paske spoke as a concerned citizen on department operations | Paske spoke as part of his official duties and within closed departmental discussions | Paske spoke as an employee; no First Amendment protection |
| Whether Paske proved Title VII race discrimination via a valid comparator | Merritt and another officer were comparators for disparate discipline | Comparators were not sufficiently similar under nearly identical circumstances | No prima facie case; discrimination claim affirmed dismissal |
| Whether Paske proved Title VII race retaliation | Department retaliated against Paske for protected activity | No protected activity shown or causal link established | District court sua sponte dismissal affirmed as harmless |
Key Cases Cited
- Lane v. Franks, 134 S. Ct. 2369 (U.S. 2014) (speech as citizen depends on whether it is within public duties)
- Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (U.S. 2006) (scope of public employee speech; duties context governs protection)
- Lee v. Kan. City S. Ry. Co., 574 F.3d 253 (5th Cir. 2009) (prima facie elements; nearly identical comparator requirement)
- Burrrell v. Dr. Pepper/Seven Up Bottling Grp., Inc., 482 F.3d 408 (5th Cir. 2007) (modified McDonnell Douglas framework for Title VII retaliation)
- Davis v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 448 F. App’x 485 (5th Cir. 2011) (vague complaints without unlawful-practice reference not protected activity)