Schulz v. GREEN COUNTY, STATE OF WIS.
645 F.3d 949
| 7th Cir. | 2011Background
- Schulz served as Green County's chief court-attached juvenile-intake worker from 1997–2008, supervised others, and was paid hourly.
- In December 2008 the County Board eliminated the court-attached position and created a Social Worker I/II in the Human Services Department to save costs and ensure 24-hour coverage.
- The vacancy was posted for five days; Schulz applied and was offered the new position, transferring with loss of seniority and a reduced hourly rate.
- The County treated the change as a legitimate governmental reorganization, selecting the Human Services department to perform the duties moving forward.
- Schulz sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming a due-process deprivation from the reorganization; the district court granted summary judgment for Green County.
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed, adopting the reorganization rule and holding the County's actions were not pretextual or aimed at Schulz personally.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the reorganization deprived Schulz of due process | Schulz argues the reorganization harmed her personally | County asserts a legitimate restructuring eliminating her position | Not entitled to due process; reorganization legitimate. |
| Whether the reorganization rule applies to Schulz's claim | Reorganization was pretextual to target Schulz | Reorganization savings and compliance with statute justify action | Rule applies; no due process violation. |
| Whether the reorganization was pretextual to harm Schulz | County acted out of spite or pretext | Financial savings drove the change, not personal targeting | Evidence shows legitimate savings motive; no pretext shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gilbert v. Homar, 520 U.S. 924 (1997) (due-process requirements when government effects employment action)
- Misek v. City of Chicago, 783 F.2d 100 (7th Cir. 1986) (reorganization rule and scrutiny for pretext when few individuals affected)
- West v. Grand County, 967 F.2d 362 (10th Cir. 1992) (pretextual reorganization assessed by its impact on individuals)
- O'Bannon v. Town Court Nursing Center, 447 U.S. 773 (1980) (no due process when entire program or facility is cut; focus on entitlement in program structure)
- Bowen v. Gilliard, 483 U.S. 587 (1987) (no property right to program structure; entitlement to benefits analyzed)
- Atkins v. Parker, 472 U.S. 115 (1985) (no due process for general demographic- or legislative program changes)