Turner v. Oliver
23-60165
| 5th Cir. | Mar 7, 2025Background
- Philip Turner, principal of Yazoo County High School, was involved in a disciplinary incident with the son of District Attorney Akillie Malone Oliver, which allegedly led to animus.
- After a student accused a school resource officer of abuse, Turner was named an accessory after the fact and indicted by a grand jury, allegedly based solely on his exercise of his Fifth Amendment right not to testify.
- A state trial court disqualified Oliver from prosecuting Turner, citing an appearance of impropriety; the Attorney General later dismissed the charges for lack of evidence.
- Before dismissal of the indictment, Oliver told school district trustees Turner had been "validly indicted," and Turner was subsequently fired.
- Turner sued Oliver individually for violations of his federal constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and for state-law torts (malicious prosecution, slander/defamation, and malicious interference with employment); all claims were dismissed by the district court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qualified immunity for statement to school trustees | Oliver's March 2020 statement was not within her job duties; statement was retaliatory | Statement was within discretionary duties as prosecutor, akin to informing the public | Oliver's statement was within official duties and protected by qualified immunity |
| Malicious interference with employment claim | Oliver made the statement with malice, causing Turner's firing and lacked justification | Statement was justified as Turner was in fact under indictment at the time | No malice actionable without lack of justification; claim dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259 (absolute and qualified immunity standards for prosecutors' statements to the media or public)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard for stating a claim)
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (qualified immunity requires violation of clearly established rights)
- Gardner v. Broderick, 392 U.S. 273 (Fifth Amendment does not permit firing an employee for invoking right to silence)
- Levens v. Campbell, 733 So. 2d 753 (Miss. 1999) (elements of tortious interference with contract in Mississippi)