Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 14 views

    Crowley v. City of Burlingame, 10th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the City of Burlingame, Kansas in a case brought by former police officer Tomas Crowley. Crowley claimed his due process rights were violated and there was a breach of implied contract when he was fired by unanimous city council vote after being employed for less than a year. The appellate court determined the district court correctly identified the legal elements and properly applied the undisputed facts in ruling for the city.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Crowley v. City of Burlingame, 10th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    14 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the City of Burlingame, Kansas in a case brought by former police officer Tomas Crowley. Crowley claimed his due process rights were violated and there was a breach of implied contract when he was fired by unanimous city council vote after being employed for less than a year. The appellate court determined the district court correctly identified the legal elements and properly applied the undisputed facts in ruling for the city.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-01-30 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-3078

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the City of Burlingame, Kansas in a case brought by former police officer Tomas Crowley. Crowley claimed his due process rights were violated and there was a breach of implied contract when he was fired by unanimous city council vote after being employed for less than a year. The appellate court determined the district court correctly identified the legal elements and properly applied the undisputed facts in ruling for the city.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    14 views3 pages

    Crowley v. City of Burlingame, 10th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the City of Burlingame, Kansas in a case brought by former police officer Tomas Crowley. Crowley claimed his due process rights were violated and there was a breach of implied contract when he was fired by unanimous city council vote after being employed for less than a year. The appellate court determined the district court correctly identified the legal elements and properly applied the undisputed facts in ruling for the city.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    F I L E D

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

    United States Court of Appeals


    Tenth Circuit

    FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

    January 30, 2006


    Elisabeth A. Shumaker

    Clerk of Court

    TOMAS L.A. CROWLEY,


    Plaintiff-Appellant
    v.
    CITY OF BURLINGAME, KANSAS

    No. 05-3078
    (D.C. No. 04-CV-2078-GTV)
    (D. Kan.)

    Defendant-Appellee.
    ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
    Before McCONNELL, ANDERSON, and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges.

    After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
    unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
    this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is
    therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
    Plaintiff Tomas L.A. Crowley appeals from the district courts
    memorandum and order granting summary judgment in favor of defendant City of
    This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
    doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
    generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
    and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

    Burlingame, Kansas on his claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 for alleged


    violation of his due process rights and breach of an implied contract under Kansas
    law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291 and affirm.
    The undisputed relevant facts are set forth in detail in Crowley v. City of
    Burlingame, 352 F. Supp. 2d 1176 (D. Kan. 2005). Briefly, Crowley was
    employed by the City as a police officer from July 18, 2002, until March 13,
    2003, when he was fired by the unanimous vote of City Council.
    We review the district courts grant of summary judgment de novo, viewing
    the evidence and drawing the reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most
    favorable to the nonmoving party. Gossett v. Okla. ex rel. Bd. of Regents for
    Langston Univ., 245 F.3d 1172, 1175 (10th Cir. 2001). Summary judgment is
    appropriate if there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is
    entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Id. at 1175.
    After reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court correctly
    identified the elements for a due process claim concerning the alleged violation of
    Crowleys property and liberty interests, as well as for breach of an implied
    contract. The court then correctly applied the law to the undisputed, material
    facts. As such, the judgment is AFFIRMED.
    Entered for the Court
    Stephen H. Anderson
    -2-

    Circuit Judge

    -3-

    You might also like