NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

_____________ N o. 09- 3836

_____________ C H R IS T IN E P E R N A , A ppel l ant
v. TOW NSHI P OF M ONT CL AI R; TOW NSH I P OF M ON TCLA I R CO UN CI L; E D R E M SE N , I ndi vi dual l yand undercol orof St at e l aw as M ay orfort he T o w n sh ip o f M o n tcl air; T E D M A T T O X , I ndi vi dual l y and under col or o f S tat e law as a m em b er o f th e c o u n c il f o r t h e T o w n sh ip o f M o n tcl air; JO Y C E R
. M IC H A E L S O N , Indi vidual l yand un d er col or of S t at e l aw as a me mb e r of t he c ou nc i l fo r t he Tow ns h i p o f M o n t c l a i r ; GERALD C. T O B IN , In d iv id u a llya n d u n d e r c o lo r o f S tate law a s a m e m b e r o f th e c o u n c il fort he Tow ns hi p of M ont cl ai r ; R O B I N SC H L A G E R , I ndi vi dual l yand under co lor o f S tat e law as a m em b er o f th e c o u n cil fo r t h e T o w n sh ip o f M o n tc la ir; J E R O L D FR E I E R , Ind ividua l l yand undercol orof St at e l aw as a mem ber o f th e c o u n c il fo r th e T o w n s h ip o f M o n tcla ir; S A N D R A L A N G , In d iv id u a lly a n d u n d e r c o lo r o f S ta te la w a s a m e m b e r o f th e c o u n c il fo r th e T o w n sh ip o f M on t cl ai r; JO S E P H M
. H A R N E T T , Indi vidual l y and un der color o f S tate law a s T o w n s h i p M a n a g e r f o r t h e T o w n s h i p o f M o n t c l a i r ; X Y Z C O R P /E N T IT IE S (1 -1 0 ); J O H N A N D J A N E D O E S ( 1- 100)

_____________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey D i s t r i ctC our tN o. 2- 05- cv- 04464 D i stri ctJudg e: T he H on orabl e Jose L
. L i nares
Subm i t t ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL
. A
. R
. 34. 1( a)

J anuary27, 2011 B e f o re : M c K E E , C hi ef

Judge , a n d S M IT H , C i rcui tJud ges,

### The Honorable Richar d G. Stear ns , United States District Judge for the United * 

### St at es Dis tri ctCo urt o f Mas sa chus etts , si tt in g b y de si gn at io n. Per na wa s hired b y the Township as a c lerk in 1984
. At the tim e of her 1 

### t e rmi n at i o n , s h e w a s w o rk i n g i n th e To wn s h i p ’s LawDe p artmen ta s al e g a l s e c r e t ary. OnSe p t emb er 2 7 , 2 0 0 6 , Ju d g e L i n ar es g rant eda mot i o nt o d i s mi s s Pe rn a’s 2 

### cl ai m s f or f ai lur e to tra in and f

or vio latio ns o f the N ewJerse y L awA ga ins t Dis cri min at io n. Pe rn a d oe s n otap pe al th is earl ie r di sm is sa l. 2 a n d S T E A R N S , D is t r i ct Judge * ( Fi l ed: February2, 2011)
OP I NI ON
S T E A R N S , D is tr i ct

Judge. C h ristin e P e rn a b ro u g h t cla im s o f F irst A m e n d m e n t r e talia tio n a n d m u n icip a l li a b ili ty undert he Feder al C i vi l R i ght s A ct , 42 U
. S. C
. §1983, agai ns t t he Tow ns hi p of M ont cl ai r , t he
m ember s of t he Tow ns hi p C ounci l , and J os eph M
. H arnet t , t he Tow ns hi p M anage r , bas ed
o n t h e i rd e c i s i o n t o t e r mi n a t e h e r t we n t y - o n e y e a r s o f e mp l o y me n t wi t h t h e T o wn s h i p . On 1 A ugus t26, 2009, t he D i s t r i ctC our tgr ant ed def endant s ’ m ot i on fors um m aryj udgm entand di s m i s s ed P er na’ s r emai ni ng cl ai m s agai ns t H arnet t and t he Tow ns hi p. O n Sept ember 25, 2 2009, Per na fi l ed a t i m el ynot i ce of appea l
. W e have j ur i s di ct i on over her appea l pur s uant t o 2 8 U. S
. C. § 1 2 9 1
. We r e v i e w de novo th e a llo w a n c e o f a m o tio n f

o r su m m a ryju d g m e n t. S tra tec h u k

v . B d . o f E d u c ., S . O ra n g e -Ma p lew o o d S c h . D ist. , 587 F. 3d 597, 603 ( 3d C ir
. 2009) , ci t i ng Pi c hl e rv . U NI TE , 542 F. 3d 380, 385 ( 3d C i r . 2008)
. For es s ent i al l yt he r eas ons
s t at ed i n t he D i s t r i ct C our t ’ s car eful and com pr ehens i ve opi ni on, w e w i l l aff i r m t he gra ntof

### The Township also argues that Perna’ s “ confidential” posi tion as a legal 3 

### se cret ary m ad e h er i ne li gi bl e fo r Uni onm em be rs hi p i n any even t. 3 s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. Per na al l eges t hatherempl o yme n ti n th e T ow ns hi p’ s L aw D epart m entw as t er m i nat ed beca us e of her uni on- r el at ed act i vi t i es . I n 2003, aft er t he T ow ns hi p deci ded aga i ns tgi vi ng annual s al ar yi ncr eas es t o nonuni on T ow ns hi p empl oy ees earni ng i n exce s s of $60, 000 per y ear , Per na and ot her aff ect ed empl oy ees s oughtt o j oi n L ocal 1040 of t he C om m uni cat i ons W o rk e rs o f

A m e ric a (U n io n ). P e rn a sta tes th a t s h e w a s in d ire c tlye n c o u ra g e d b yH a rn e tt,
w ho had bee n r ece nt l yhi r ed as t he T ow ns hi p M anage r , t o for go U ni on m ember s hi p i n or der t o be el i gi bl e fora pr om ot i on orot herel evat i on of j ob s t atus . Per na cl ai m s that w h en s he
co m p li ed, s he w as t er m i nat ed. ( T he “e ncour agement ” i s al l eged t o have be en conve y ed t hr ough a U n ion rep resent at i ve w ho w as negot i at i ng t he j ob cl as s i fi cat i ons t hatw oul d be
c o v e re d b y a n y b a r g a in in g a g re e m e n t w ith th e T o w n sh ip ). T h e T o w n sh ip , fo r its p a rt,
m ai nt ai ns t hat Per na’ s pos i t i on w as el i m i nat ed as par tof a c os t - s avi ng pl an i m pl ement ed by H arnet ti n 2004 t hatl ed t o a net r educt i on of ei ghtT ow ns hi p empl oy ee pos i t i ons . A m ong th e jo b s e lim in a ted w a s P e rn a ’s p o sitio n in th e L a w D e p a rtm e n t. 3 T he dec i s i on t o abol i s h Per na’ s pos i t i on had i t s or i gi ns i n a pr opos ed r es t ructur i ng of t he Law D epart m ent cr aft ed byA l an Tre m bul ak, t he eve ntual l ys ucce s s ful candi dat e fort he pos i t i on of ( par t - t i m e) T ow ns hi p A t t or ney . T r embul ak r ecomm ended r eor gani zi ng t he Law D epart m ent by addi ng a par t - t i m e A s s i s t ant T ow ns hi p A t t or ney . Per na’ s $64, 995 s al aryw as t o b e a p p o r t i o n e d b e tw e e n t h e n e w A s s i s t a n tA t t o r n e y a n d a p a r t - t i m e , l o w e r - p a i d s e c r e t a r y.4

T r embul ak, w hen he made the p rop o sal, d i d notknow t hatPer na had be en an a ct i ve
s u p p o rt e r o f

th e U n io n . U n d er A m br os e v. Tw

p. of R obi ns on, P a. , 3 0 3 F .3 d 4 8 8 , 4 9 3 (3 rd C ir. 2 0 0 2 ), w e a p p ly a t hree- partt estt o an al y ze w hethera pu bli c em ploy ee w ho al l eges r et al i at i on for her exerci se of Fi r s tA m endment r i ght s h as s etouta p r i ma fa c ie cas e. A pl ai nt i ff musts how t hats he engage d i n a pr ot ect ed act i vi t y , and t hat t he act i vi t y w as a s ubs t ant i al orm ot i vat i ng caus e of her t erm i nati on . T he b urden then sh if ts t o the em ploy er t o d em on strat e t hat the ad verse
e m p lo y m e n t a c tio n w o u ld h a v e ta k e n p la c e d e s p ite th e p ro te c te d c o n d u c t. I d. W hi l e aw ar ds
o f su m m a ryju d g m e n t ar e a s ra re a s h e n ’s tee th in F irst A m e n d m e n t re talia tio n c a se s, w e w ill aff i r m s uch a n aw ard w h er e a pl ai nt i ff doe s notpr oduce s uffi ci entevi dence t o s hi ftt he b u rd e n o f

p e rs u a s io n to d e f

e n d a n ts . T hat an em ploy ee’s ri gh t t o pursue affil i at i on w i t h a U nion i s prot ect ed b yt he F i rs t A m e n d m e n t is b e y o n d c a v il. See P i cke r i ng v. B d. of E duc. , 3 9 1 U
. S
. 5 6 3 , 5 7 4 -57 5 (19 6 8 ); S h elt on v. Tucker , 3 6 4 U. S. 4 7 9 , 4 8 5
- 4 8 6 ( 1 9 6 0 )
. Al t h o u g h t h e To wns h i p d i s a g r e e s , t he D istri ct C o u rtfo u n d su ff icie n t evid en ce cre ati n g a m aterial d ispu te of fa ct as to H arn ett ’s k n o w led g e o f

P e rn a ’s U n io n a c tiv ity(im p u tab le to th e T o w n s h ip ), a d e ter m in a tio n w ith
w h ic h w e h a v e n o re a s o n to q u a rr e l. Per na’ s evi dence t hathert er m i nat ion came i n r et al i at i on forherU ni on act i vi t i es
cons i s t s pr i nci pal l yof t he t es t i m onyof Ted M at t ox, a Tow ns hi p C ounci l m ember
. M at t ox stat ed in h is de p o sit ion that h e d id n o t see an y fin an cial b en ef itin the eli m ination o f P ern a’s pos i t i on, and thatt he C ounci l had di s cus s ed the fact t hat “i t w oul d be ea s yt o getr i d of Per na

### W e need not address defendants’ alternative argum ent that they have satisfied 4 

### their burden und er M

t. H ealth y Ci tySc h. D ist
. B d. of E duc
. v . D oy le , 429 U
. S. 274 (1 977) , in show ing that “ the sam e adve rs e ac tio n w oul d have take n place in the absence of the protected c ondu ct.” H ill v . Ci tyof Sc ranton , 4 11 F. 3d 1 18, 125 ( 3d Ci r. 20 05 ). 5 beca us e s he w as n’ ti n t he U ni on. ” A ppel l antB r . at4. Per na cont ends that t hi s s t at ement “cl ear l ys how s t hatdefe ndant s w er e m ot i vat ed by [her ] U ni on i nvol vement w hen theym ade t he deci s i on t o el i m i nat e her pos i t i on. ” I d. at5. She al s o cl ai m s t hatH arnet tendor s ed the vi ew t hat“w hen som eone i s a m ember of t he U ni on and y ou w antt o t er m i nat e thatpos i t i on, t her e maybe bumpi ng and s eni or i t ypr ocedur es . ” I d. a t 2 3
. T h e D istri ct C o u rt , h o w ev er, d eterm ined that H arn ett ’s a ll eg ed k n o w ledg e o f P ern a’s U ni on i nvol vement , even w hen coupl ed w i th M att o x ’s t es t i m ony , di d notbr i dge the
caus at i on pr ong of t he A m brose t es t . A l m os tt w o y ear s s epar at ed the l as tof Per na’ s U ni on act i vi t i es fr om hert er m i nat i on, acut el y under m i ni ng her ar gum ent of a caus al l i nk betw een t he tw o. “[A ]l t ho ug h ‘m ere passage of ti m e i s n ot l egall ycon cl usi ve p roof ag ai nst
r et ali ati o n , ’ w e have i ndi cat ed thatt he pas s age of an ext ended pe r i od of t i m e betw een pr ot ect ed ac t i vi t yand an a l l eged r et al i at or yact i on w ei ghs agai ns ta fi ndi ng of a c aus al l i nk
w her e ther e i s no evi dence of r et al i at or yani m us dur i ng t he i nt er veni ng per i od. ” Shanerv. S y n th e s , 204 F. 3d 494, 505 ( 3d C i r . 2000) , ( quot i ng Kr ous e v. A m . St er i l iz erC o. , 126 F. 3d 494, 503- 504 ( 3d C i r . 1997) )
. H er e, t he tw o- y earhi atus , com b ined w it h t he fa ctt hatt he pr opos al t o el i m i nat e Perna’s pos i t i on or i gi nat ed w i t h T r embul ak, w ho w as unaw ar e of Per na’ s U ni on act ivit i es , l eads us t o concl ude thatt he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s fi ndi ng on t he
caus at i on pr ong of A m brose w a s c o rre c t. 46

For t hi s r eas on, t he D i s t r i ct C our t ’ s deci s i on t o aw ar d s um m aryj udgm entw i l l be aff i r m ed.