Former city employee brought action against city, and various city employees, alleging due process and wrongful termination claims. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants on employee’s tort claims, but against defendants on employee’s due process claim. Defendants appealed, and employee cross-appealed.
According to employee, she and the city had an oral employment agreement for a term of 50 years. A very common arrangement.
The Court of Appeals held that former employee did not have a protected property interest in her employment subject to procedural due process.
Employee, whose employment was terminable at will, and who did not have a valid contract of employment with city, did not have a protected property interest in her employment that was subject to procedural due process, absent a showing that any official city document, ordinance, or statute altered her status as an at-will employee and provided that she could only be fired for cause.