Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-02213/USCOURTS-ca10-91-02213-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 

---

F I .L .:2.i LJ 

Unitro Statrf-_ C~ur-~ ~! Ax;·; ~~. Tr.:- ::1! (:. -·:~: ~ UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

ROBERTS. TERRY, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

TOWN OF RED RIVER; HAROLD YOUNG, 

Individually, and in his official 

capacity as Mayor of the Town of 

Red River, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

AUG 2 5 1992 

ROBERT L. HOECKEE 

Clerk 

No. 9 1-2213 

(D.C. No. 90-206-SC) 

(D.N . M.) 

Before MOORE, TACBA, and BRORBY, 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); 10th Cir. R. 34.1 . 9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Appellant Roberts. Terry appeals from an order of the 

district court granting defendants' motion for sununary judgment on 

Terry's age discrimination, equal protection and first amendment 

claims. Terry alleged that he was constructively discharged from 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines or the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 91-2213 Document: 010110287330 Date Filed: 08/25/1992 Page: 1
his position as Town Program Administrator for the Town of Red 

River, New Mexico as a result of the unlawful conduct of Mayor 

Harold Young. He contends that Young discriminated against him on 

the basis of age in violation of the Age Discrimination in 

Employment Act (ADEA), 29 u.s.c. § 621, et.~ Terry also 

asserts that Young acted under color of law to deprive Terry of 

his Fourteenth Amendment equal protection and First Amendment free 

speech rights in violation of 42 u.s.c. § 1983. 

The district court granted summary judgment for the 

defendants. We exercise jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 

AFFIRM for substantially the reasons given by the district court. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 91-2213 Document: 010110287330 Date Filed: 08/25/1992 Page: 2