Taylor v. ST. LOUIS COUNTY BD. OF ELECTION COM'RS
625 F.3d 1025
| 8th Cir. | 2010Background
- Taylor, former Democratic Director of Elections for St. Louis County, sues Board of Election Commissioners and four Commissioners for wrongful discharge and for Equal Pay Act violations.
- Board discharged Taylor by unanimous vote; she alleges retaliation for testifying under subpoena about a voter-ID issue.
- Missouri recognizes public-policy wrongful-discharge exceptions to at-will employment; plaintiff seeks wrongful-discharge claim under Missouri law.
- District court granted summary judgment to Commissioners in their individual capacities on wrongful-discharge claim; Board/Commissioners in official capacities had immunity.
- Missouri law requires an employer/employee relationship for wrongful-discharge claims; the issue is whether Commissioners in their individual capacities were Taylor’s employers.
- This appeal challenges the grant of summary judgment as to the Commissioners in their individual capacities on the wrongful-discharge claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether public-policy wrongful discharge requires an employer/employee relationship. | Taylor argues Commissioners can be liable regardless of status. | Defendants contend only the employer may be liable. | No; only an actual former employer may be liable. |
| Whether the individual Commissioners can be Taylor’s employers for wrongful discharge. | Taylor contends they had power to hire/fire/supervise. | Commissioners lacked control over employment decisions. | No; individual Commissioners were not Taylor’s employers. |
| Whether Missouri right-of-control factors show an employer/employee relationship exists. | Right of control supports employer status. | Statutes assign hiring/discharge to the Board, not to individuals. | No genuine issue; no control indicia showing individual liability. |
| Whether any cited cases support imposing liability on board members personally. | Cases show potential liability for officials. | Those cases concern different contexts (1983 claims, broader statutory definitions). | Distinguishing; not controlling for public-policy wrongful discharge here. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fleshner v. Pepose Vision Inst., P.C., 304 S.W.3d 81 (Mo. 2010) (public policy exception to at-will employment)
- Luethans v. Washington Univ., 894 S.W.2d 169 (Mo. 1995) (plaintiff must be a discharged employee)
- Chandler v. Allen, 108 S.W.3d 756 (Mo.Ct.App. 2003) (employer/employee relationship required for wrongful discharge)
- Keveney v. Mo. Military Acad., 304 S.W.3d 98 (Mo. 2010) (abrogates part allowing only at-will employees to sue)
- Moran v. Clark, 359 F.3d 1058 (8th Cir. 2004) (relevance to § 1983; not controlling here)
- Darby v. Bratch, 287 F.3d 673 (8th Cir. 2002) (broad statutory definitions of employer; distinguishable)
- Genasci v. City of O'Fallon, 2008 WL 3200812 (E.D. Mo. 2008) (federal case; not controlling)