Seegmiller v LaVerkin City
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
528 F.3d 762 (2008)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Sharon Johnson (plaintiff) was a police officer with the LaVerkin City Police Department (the city) (defendant). Sharon was also employed as a member of the Washington County SWAT team. At a police-officer training conference, Sharon engaged in extramarital sexual relations with an officer from another police department. Sharon’s husband, Heath Johnson, enraged by the city’s failure to discipline Sharon for the affair, falsely accused Sharon of having an affair with her immediate supervisor, Chief Kim Seegmiller (plaintiff). Seegmiller and Sharon were both suspended from all public employment but were reinstated with the police department after the city discovered that Heath’s accusation was unfounded. The city subsequently issued a private, oral reprimand to Sharon, sanctioning her for violating the police department’s code of ethics. Specifically, the reprimand stated that, by engaging in an extramarital affair during the training conference, Sharon had impermissibly allowed her private conduct to interfere with her duties as a police officer. Because the reprimand meant Sharon was no longer an officer in good standing, Sharon was unable to reinstate her employment with the Washington County SWAT team. Sharon subsequently resigned from the police department. Sharon and Seegmiller sued the city on a variety of civil rights and tort claims. In relevant part, Sharon raised a substantive-due-process claim against the city, alleging that the city’s reprimand had violated her fundamental liberty interest in sexual privacy. The district court granted the city’s motion for summary judgment. Sharon appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Tymkovich, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.