Garcetti v. Ceballos
United States Supreme Court
547 U.S. 410, 126 S. Ct. 1951 (2006)
- Written by Megan Petersen, JD
Facts
Richard Ceballos (plaintiff), a deputy district attorney for the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, believed an affidavit used to obtain a critical search warrant contained severe inaccuracies and contacted the warrant affiant, a Los Angeles deputy sheriff, about the reasons for the inaccuracies. Ceballos was unsatisfied with the deputy sheriff’s answers and relayed his findings to his supervisors. Ceballos recommended that the case be dismissed. His supervisors decided to proceed with the prosecution, however, and Ceballos was called by the defense to testify about the inaccuracies in the affidavit. After his testimony, Ceballos claimed that he was subjected to several retaliatory employment actions. Ceballos brought suit in federal district court against Garcetti (defendant), the Los Angeles County district attorney, on the grounds that the First Amendment protected his testimony. The district court ruled that Garcetti was protected by qualified immunity, but the court of appeals reversed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)
Dissent (Breyer, J.)
Dissent (Stevens, J.)
Dissent (Souter, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
