## In the



# U n ited S ta tes Co urt o f Ap p ea ls

F o rth eS e v e n th C ir cu it

N o. 10

- 2729 R OBERT Z ELL NER, a W i sco nsi n re si dent, P laint if f-A ppell ant, v.
D ARY L H ERR I CK, a W i sco nsi n re si dent, i n h i s o ffi ci alc apa ci tya s S upe r i nt en den t of th e C ed arb u rg Sc h oo l D ist ric t, etal., D efend a nts-A pp ellees.

A pp eal from the United S t ates Di strictC our t fo r the E astern Di stricto f Wisc onsin
. No . 2:08- cv-00315

—Rudo lphT. Rand a, Judge
.
A RGUED F EB RU AR Y 10, 2011

— D ECI DE D A PRI L 29, 2011

Befo re M A NI ON, E VANS, an d H A MI L T ON, C ircu it Judges . E VANS, Cir cu i tJudg e . R o b e r tZ e l l ne r, a h i g h s c ho ol bi ol ogyte acherand f or m erte acher ’ s uni on pre si dent, w as fi re d by hi s e m plo yer, the Ced arburg Scho ol Dist ri ct, f oral l ege dly v iewing pornog ra phic i m age s o n hi s s choolco m pu teri n vi ol atio n o fDis tr i ct pol i cy.2 N o. 10

- 2729

T h i s c l a i m i s a c t u a l l y a F o u r t e e n th A me n d me n tc l a i m. 1 W e’ l l r efert o i tas a due pr oc es s c l ai m as we m ove al ong. Zel l ner, bel i eving i nstea d th at h e was fi re d because o f hi s uni on a c tivi ti es, fi l ed a c i vi lr i ghts com pla i nt under 42 U. S

. C. § 19 83 a g ains t Defen dan ts Da r y lHer r i ck, J o hn Penderga st, and Linda Bor kenhage n, i n thei r offi ci al c a p a c itie s, an d th e C ed arb u rg Sc h oo l D ist ric t (w e w ill refer to t h e d efend an ts coll ectively as “th e D istri ct”), al l eg i ngv i o l at i o ns o fhi s F i r sta nd F i fthAm en dm en t 1 ri ghts. The di str i ct c ou rtgr anted the Dis tr i ct’ s m oti on t o di smi ss wi thr espectt o Ze l l ne r ’ s due pr o ce ss c l ai m a nd the Di str i ct’s sum m ar y j ud gm ent m oti on with re spect to hi s F i r stAm en dm en t cl ai m . Ze l l ne rno w appe al s, a nd we vi ew t h e f a c t s , a s we mu s ta tth i s t i me , i n th e l i g ht m ost favorable to Zellner. Zel l ner w or ked atCedarburgH i gh Sc h oo l as a bi ol ogy te ac he r fo rne ar l y e l ev eny ea r s unt i lhi s empl o y m en t w as ter m i nated o n J anuary17, 20 06 . A t al lr el evantti m es J ayGriegerwas the Pr i nc i palo fthe hi g h s ch o o la nd Ze l l ne r ’ s i m m edi at e su per vi so r. H er r i ckha s be enthe Su p eri ntendent ofthe Dist ri ct s i nce J uly1, 20 02. Pe nde r g as t, e l ec te d t o the S ch o o l B o ar d i n the s pr i ng of 2004, has been Scho olBoar d Presi dent si nce 20 05. Bork enhagen i s the Dir ecto r ofTechnol ogyf orthe Dist ri ct. Becau se Z ell ner ass er ts that he was fi re d as a r esul t o f hi s uni on a cti vi ti es, we begin w i th the ye ar s o fani m osi ty between the U ni on a nd th e D i str i ct l eadi ng up to Zel l ner’ s t er m i nati on. W hi l e e m plo yed bythe Dist ri ct, Zel l ner w as an acti ve m em ber of the Ced arburg E du ca-N o. 10

- 2729 3 ti on Associ ati on ( th e “U n i on”)

. In the f al lo f20 03, Zel l ner becam e th e p resi dent ofthe U ni on, se rv i ng i n that po si ti o n fo rtw o ye ar s. F r o m 2 00 5 unt i lhi s te r m i na ti o n, Zel l ner w as the Union re prese n tati ve f orthe hi gh schoo l

. Bef or e, duri ng, and afte r Zel l ner’ s t er m as Uni o n pr es i den t, r el at i o ns b etwee n the Uni o n and th e Di s t r i c twe r e p l a g ue d. I n 200 3 Herr i ck re com m ended that the S choolBoar d not r en ew Pr i nc i palGr i eg er ’ s empl o y m en t co nt r ac t. The Board, however, re j ected H er ri ck’ s pro posalbya vot e of f our- to- thre e. S hor tl y there after, Zel l ner and 58 o ther hi g h s ch o o ls ta ffmem be r s publ i sh ed a s tatem en t i n a l oca lpaper that cri ti ci zed H erric k a nd the Board f or try i ngt o o us t Gr i eg er . La te r, Ze l l ne rwas quo te d i n a local p ap er saying th at H errick and the D istri ct w ere cr ea tinga n “ at m o sph er e o func er tainty, di st r us t an d i nt i m idati o n b etwee n the di st r i cta dm i ni st r at i o n a nd th e [h igh sc h oo l] st aff.” Zel l ner, i n hi s ca paci ty as U nion p re si dent, r efused to agr ee to H er ri ck’ s pro posed Quali fi ed Econom i c Offer (“Q E O ”) that resu lted in sa la r y red uc tions for Ced arbu rg te ac he r s, makingthe m a m o ngthe l o wes t p ai d i n the ar ea . Ze lln er als o fa c ilita te d a “D ist ric t L ea d e r s h ip S ur ve y Re po r t” i n whi chUni o n mem be r s ev alua te d the p er for m an c e o f ad m in ist ra to rs . Th e r e p or t w as ex tr em ely cri tical o fHer r i ck

. W he n Ze l l ne ra tt empte d t o pr es en t th e rep ort to the Sch oo l B oard , H errick directed Boa rd m em ber s no t t o open the re port
. Fol l owing a co ntenti ous c ontr act nego ti atio n se ssi on between the U ni on a n d Schoo lBoar d, H er ri ck w ar ned4 N o. 10

- 2729 Zel l ner that “the gl oves w ou ld com e o ff ” i fthe U ni on did notb ack dow n. H e a l so i nfo rm ed Zel l ner that a “pro m i nent m em bero fthe com m u n i ty” had cl ai m ed Zel l ner w as i nto pornog ra phy, bu t that because i t was not schoo l

- re l ate d, he would notr epor t Zel l ner at that ti m e. InD ec em b er 20 04 , Z elln er , as U n ion p re sid en t, p u b licly spoke i n opposi ti on t o the c re ati on o fa t as k fo rce by H errick becau se Princ ipal Grieger an d v o lun teer teac he rs w ere n ot all ow ed to p articipate
. A m ont h be fore H errick’s contr act w as up fo r re new al, Zel l ner i nfo rm ed H er ri ck that t h e U ni on had se cured a “no confi dence” vo te i n h i s lead ershi p b y s o m e 95 pe r ce nto fpa r ti ci pat i ng teac he rs. Th e vote w as d iscus sed at several sch ool board m eet i ngs in 200 5. I n J an uary20 05, i n hi s ca paci ty as U ni on pre si dent, Z ell ne r i ssu ed a press rele a s e titl ed , “D istri ct T each ers Vote ‘ N o Confi d en c e’ in

. . . H er ri ck, ” a nd hel d a pre ss con ferenc e o n t h e sam e sub j ect. A rticl es on th e U nion ’s p os i ti on, and H er ri ck’ s r esponse , were pu bl i shed in the M il w auk eeJournal Se ntine l an d th e Ce da r b u rg New s G raphic

. Shor tl y there after, the Scho olB oar d re quir ed that U ni on re prese ntati ves, i ncl ud i ng Zel l ner, m eetwith H er ric k, m embe r s o fthe Di st r i ctl ea der sh i p t ea m , a nd the Board, f orthe sta ted purpose ofattem pti ng to i m prove r el at i o n s b e t we e n th e Un i o n a n d th e D i s t r i c t
. A me e t i ng w as hel d on J anua ry 2 4, 2005 , and al lpart i es agr eed that i t w oul d b e “off the re cor d,” and no notes w ou ld be tak en. A fterthe m ee tin g, H er ri ck sent an e- m ai lto P e n d e r g a s t( wh o mi s s e d p a r to fth e me e t i n g ) s u mmar i z i ngwh a th a d o c c ur r e d.N o. 10

- 2729 5 F o l l o wi ngthe me e t i ng, a c i t i z e n mad e a n o pe n r e c o r ds re quest, and the Dist ri ct produced the e- m ai lbe tw een H er ri ck and Pend er gast. In the e- m ai l, wh i ch Zel l ner bel i eve s br eached the “offthe re cor d” agr eem ent, H er ri ck sta ted thatt h e tea cher s g ave hi m an ul ti m atum to accept onl y a o ne- yea r contr act and tol d him the U ni on wo ul d notwo r kwi th h i m i fh e a g r e e d t o r e n e w fo rt wo yea rs . U po n recei vi ng the e- m ai l, the ci ti zen wrot e t o th e O z a u k e e C o u n t y S h e r i ffa n d D i s t r i c tA t t o r n e y c o mpla i ni ng ab out the Union’ s ul ti m atum and a sking the m to inv es tig at e w h et h er it vio lat ed an y la w s. A n art icle w as al so pu bl i shed i n the M ilw a uk ee Jou rna l Sen tinel di sc us singthe e - m ai l s an d the po te nt i ali nv es ti g at i o n. So on aft erthe m eet i ng, the Board o ffer ed H er ri ck

— an d h e a ccepted

— a n e w t wo - y e a rc o nt r a c t
. In Apr i l20 05, al li nc um be ntBo ar d m embe r s wer e r e- el ec te d, g i ving th em w h a t th ey co n sid er ed to be a “t ou gh ” m an d at e in dea l i ngwi ththe Uni o n. B y Ju ne , the Bo ar d a nd the U ni on h ad notr eached an agr eem ent o n the Col l ecti ve B argaining A greem en t for 2003 -2005, and t h e B oard im p lem en ted a secon d QE O resulting in furth er salary r edu cti o ns , a g ain mak i ngCe darbur gt ea ch er s among the l owest pai d i n the ar ea. I n Aug us t 20 05 , Zel l ne r ’ s te r m a s Uni o n pr es i den t ended, but he sti l lr em ai ned i nvol ved i n unio n act i vi ti es unt il h is t er m i na ti o n. Re l at i o ns b etwee n the Uni o n a nd the Di str i ct re m ai ned vol ati l e, but Zel l ner did not speak o u t pu bl i cl y o r tal k with H er ri ck orPenderg ast perso nal l y r eg ar d i ng Un i on i ssues any ti m e a fter February24, 20 05.6 N o. 10

- 2729 On D ecem ber15 , 20 05, the M ilw a uk ee Jou rna l Sen tinel p ub li sh ed an article en titl ed , “C ed arbu rg L osing M ore T each ers

— So m e C ite L ow P ay , Po litic s at H igh Sc h oo l.” In th e article Z ell ne r i s rep orted as s a y in g , “W he n you start los in g vet er an te ac h er s to re tir em en t th at is on e th in g,” b u t “ w h en you n ge r t e ac h er s le av e, it’s a re al w ar n in g.” Z ellne r clai m s tha t H errick and Pen d ergast w ere aw are that he was in tervi ew ed ( they w er e a l so i nter vi ew ed f o rthe a r t i c l e ) a nd tha tthe y kne w wha th e s a i d. Sig n ifica n tly m or e re lev an t t o Z e l ln er ’s t er m in at ion is th e fact tha t on A ug u s t 1 5 , 2 005, the Sch ool B oard up dated i ts co m pu terusag e pol i cy enti tl ed, “Em plo yee A c c es s t o N et w or ke d Info rm at ion R e so u rc es ” (t h e “ P olicy ”) . Z elln er sign ed off on th e u p d at ed P olic y, ac kn ow led gin g t h at h e w as res p on s i b l e for c om p lian c e w ith it and that v i ol ati ons coul d res ultin a lo ss ofacc ess an d /o r disc i plinaryact i on. Incl ud ed i n the Pol i cy i s a rul e no ti fyi ng em plo yee s th at thei r com pu terusag e i s n o t p riv at e a n d m ay be m on ito re d . Th e P olic y s p ec ifica l l y s ta te s th at“ ac ce ss i ng, se nd i ngo rdi spl ay i ng offe n s i v e m es sa ge s, p ict u re s o r c h ild p or n og ra p h y” is st r i ct l y pr o hibi te d. The Po li cya l so s ta te s th atthe “netw or k ad m in ist ra tor wil l r epor t i napp ro pri ate behavi orto the em plo yee ’ s s up er vi sorwh o w i l lta ke ap p ro p ria te d isc ip lin ar y a c tio n .” I n N ove m ber20 04, the Dist ri ct’ s t echn ol ogydepartm e nth a d r e i mag e d ( wi pe d c l e a n) a numb e ro fdi str i ct em plo yee s’ co m pu ter s be cause ofco m pla int s o f“s pyw ar e” and “popu ps. ” Zel l ner’ s s choolco m pu terwas re i m age d at th is ti m e, a n d B orken ha gen, as w e said th e D istri ct’sN o. 10

- 2729 7

A cco rd ing to the Po licy, B or k en ha g en m u st r ep or t all 2 “i nappr opr i at e beh avi or s , ” “ vi ol at i ons ” or “co m pl ai nt s ” to the em ployee’ s su p er v is or, i n thi s cas e, G ri eger. At thi s ti m e, howeve r, Zel l ne r had n otbe enac c us ed o fvi ol at i ng a pol i c y. Dir ecto r ofTechnol ogy, w as aw ar e o fthe re i m aging. A l m ost ten m onths l ate r, i n l ate A ugust 2005 , Z ellner r epo r te d tha t hi s co m put erhad “g o ne c r az y, ” an d he w as u n ab le t o u s e i t
. Z elln er ’s c om p u te r w as ag ain re im age d. J eanne Dri es, the I T techni ci an wh o re i m age d Z ell ne r ’s c om p ut er, told B orken ha gen that Zellner’s com pu terwas ver y m ess ed up and tha t in her opi ni on i t “doesn’ t get that w ay w i thout som e behav ior that

— going to si tes that w er e questi onabl e.” Bor kenhage n r e p o r t e d t o H e r r i c k, he r s u p e r v i s o r, th a tZ e l l n e r ’ s c o mpu ter had t o be re i m age d a seco nd ti m e. B or kenhagen d id n ot notify Grieger, Z ell ne r’s i m m ed iate sup ervisor. 2 Aft erHerri ckl ea r ne d abo utthe s ec o nd r ei m ag i ng, he di r ec te d Bo r k enha g ent o pl ac e m o ni to r i ngs o ftware on Zel l ner’ s com pu ter
. The softw ar e continually logg ed Zel l ner’ s com pu ter acti vi ty, but the re sul ts w er e n ot vi ewabl e unl es s th eyw er e spe ci fi ca l l y a cc es se d. Bo r k en ha gen i nitially ch ecke d the log every d ay, bu t after a w hil e s he check ed w i th decr eas i ng fre quency. Zel l ner ackno w l edges that the Di str i ct had the r i ght t o pla ce m onitoring softw are on h is com p ut er. On Sund ay, N ove m ber6, 20 05, Zel l ner w as at schoo l w or ki ng o n hi s cl ass pl an and used hi s s choolco m pu ter to c o nduc t a Googl e Im ag e se ar ch

. F i r st, Ze l l ne rdi se ngag ed the “safe sear ch” fi l ter
. H e then typed “bl onde” into8 N o. 10

- 2729 the Goo gl e s ear ch box. The se ar ch pro du ced 20 “thum bnai l ” i m age s, al lo fthem por nogr aphic, with l in ks to mo r e i ma g e s wi th i n a n d o u t s i d e th e G o o g l e web s i t e . He then cl i cked t o displ ay the next 20 i m age s. Zel l ner then cl i cked a l i nk ent i tl ed “m or e o fthes e” adj acent to i m age s fro m ww w . ar dentes. fre e. frbl onde. com . W hen Z ell ner did so, ano ther20 por nogr aphic “thum bnai l ” i m age s w er e di spl aye d on hi s m oni torf ora tot alo f17se conds. Ze l lner di d no t cl i cko n a ny o fthe pho to g r aph s displ aye d in hi s s ear ch. The enti re i nci dent to ok 67 seconds. I n ear l y Dece m berBor kenhagen vi ew ed the l og fro m Zel ln er ’s N ove m ber6 sea rch. S he was al er ted by the s ear ch te rm “blon de” i n Zel l ner’ s a cti vi ty l og. Bork enhagen re cre ate d Zel l ner’s ac tiv itie s, w h ich Zel l ner adm its a re acc urat e. S hor tl y a fterBor kenhage n disc ov er ed the sea rch, she i nfo rm ed H er ri ck and gave h im t h e a ccurat e l og ofwh at happ ened. H er ri ck re l aye d the info rm ati on t o Penderga st. On D ecem ber20 , 20 05, H er ri ck and Ja m es R. Koro m (th e D ist ric t’ s le ga l co u n se l) m etw ith Z elln er an d h is unio n re prese ntati ve, Patr i ck Connol l y, to disc uss Ze l l ne r ’ s N o ve m be r6 Go o g l e I m ag e se ar ch

. The meet i ng w as no t record ed

. Zelln e r w as fi rst asked to confirm the det ai l s o fhi s “ bl onde” s ear ch, a n d that the i m age s obt ain ed by re cre ating hi s s ear ch w er e a ccurat e, wh i ch he di d. Zel l ner w as then as ked i f h e h ad perf or m ed si m i l ars ea r ch es i n the pa st, a nd he c o nfi r m ed thathe had. A ccor d in g to H er ri ck, Zel l ner’ s r esponse was “not mor e tha n mon thly . ” Ac c o r di ngt o Ze l l ne rh e r e s po nd e d, “once i n that m ont h .” Furtherm or e, he a dm i tte d thatN o. 10

- 2729 9 he had acce sse d pornog ra phy on a Dis tr i ct c om pu ter fi ve o rs i x t i m es o ve rs ev er aly ea r s. Ze l l ne ra l so c o nceded that hi s a cti ons on N ove m ber6 w er e a vi ol ati on ofthe Dist ri ct’ s Po l i cy and l egi ti m ate expecta ti ons. A t the m ee tin g, Zel l ner offer ed to si gn a l astchance agr eem ent o r re si gn atthe end ofthe schoo lyear . H er ri ck did notacc ept t h es e offer s a nd i nstea d gave Zel l ner the o pti on t o re si gn i m m edi ate l y o r have the m att er p u t b efo re t h e S c h oo l B oa rd . Th e m ee tin g e n d ed w ith all par ti es unde r st an di ngtha t Ze l l ne rwoul d ha ve a n e xte nd e d pe r i o d o f t i me t o de c i de whe the r t o r e s i g n or go f or w ar d w i th a hear i ng. A l lpart i es al so und er sto od tha tu l t i mat e l y o nly the S choolBo a r d c o ul d d e c i de Zel l ne r’ s f ate
. S ubsequentl y, H er ri ck l earned that Ze l l ne rha d de ci ded no t to r es i g n. Her r i ck, K o r o m , a nd Penderga st then c onfer re d by t el ephone and deci ded th e Sc h oo l B oa rd w o u l d h old a d isc ip lin ar y h ea rin g in J anuary . As S ch o o lBo ar d Presiden t, i t was Pe nde r g as t’ s r es po nsibi l i ty to deter m i ne wh ethert h e m eet i ng would be an o pe n o rc l o s e d s e s s i o n. P e nd e r g a s tkne w tha tZ e l l ne r had request ed a c l ose d hearing, an d a lthough he di d not know the e xact det ai l s o fthe evi dence

— o nl y th atthe Dist ri ct had di sc ov ered w hat i t s ai d w as pornog ra phy on Zel l ner’ s co m pu ter, abo ut a w eekbefor e the J anuary17 h ea rin g, he deci ded i t would be an o pen ses si on. H e did so knowing that, gi ven the subj ect m att er, an o pen he ar i ngwoul d l i k ely da m ag e Ze l l ne r ’ s r epu ta ti o n. Ac c o r d i n g t o Z e l l n e r, th e l o n g - s t a n d i n g p r a c t i c e o ft he S c ho o l Bo a r d wa s no t t o i de nt i fy a n e mpl o y e e by nam e, ordescr ibe c harg es i n advance o fa disc i plinaryhear i ng.10 N o. 10

- 2729

The p hotos w ere taken by stud ents w hil e i n H aw aii f or a 3 b iolo g y trip an d w ere u sed f or th e scho ol y ear b oo k

. P en d erg ast adm i t t ed th at non e ofthe phot os ofs t udent s wer e i nappr opriat e and that Z elln er c ould no l onger acce ss the photos as th ey h a d b ee n d el et ed

. H owever, the noti ce o fhea ring publ i shed by Penderga st id en tifi ed Zel l ner by nam e a nd descr ibed the charg e agains t him as m isuse of a School District com p ut er. There w as no m enti on o fpor nogr aphy i n the noti ce. Befo r e t he he ar i ng, Her r i cka sk ed Bo r k enha g ent o fi nd a for ensic an al ystto i nspect Zel l ner’ s co m pu terto dete r m i ne i fthe re was a ny o th eri na ppr o pr i at e co nt en t w hich had been de leted

. Borke nh agen h ir e d a firm w hi ch r eturn ed a d i sk offi l es f ound on the hard dri ve. B orken ha gen gave th e d isk to H e r rick, and , at H errick’s re quest, pri nted out the i m age s. He r r i c ka n d Ko r o m p r e p a r e d c h a r g e s wh i c h we r e s en t to Zel l ner vi a ce rt i fi ed m ail, b u t were othe rwis e no t re l eas ed to anyo ne pri or to the m eet i ng. Par agr aph 5( g) o f th e ch ar g es r ea ds as f o l l o ws: “ [ Ze l l ne r ] s el ec te d o ne pho to fr o m the s ec o nd pa g e o fhi s se ar chr esul ts , a nd ac ce ss ed the w eb si te e nt i tl ed ‘ ar den te s. fr ee . frbl o nde , ’ a nd th en rev iew ed im ag es on t h at p or n og ra p h ic w eb sit e.” Para gr ap h 7 ofthe charg es sta tes that“[ a] nal ysi s o f M r. Zel l ner’ s co m pu terr eve al ed additi onalev i dence. Am o n go th e ri ma g e s , Z e l l n e rh a d r e t a i n e d p h o t o g r a p hs of fe m ale st u d en ts of th e D ist ric t w ea r i n g b ikin is w hi l e o n a s chool

- sponsor ed tr i p to H aw ai i ” that Ze l l ne rc ha pe r o ne d. 3N o. 10

- 2729 11 On J an ua r y 1 7, 2 00 6, the Sc ho o lBo ar d he l d a he ar i ng re gardingthe charg es aga i nst Zel l ner. Zel l ner w as re presente d by Un ion counsel, the adm i ni str ati on was r epres e n t e d b y Ko r o m, a n d th e S c h o o l Bo a r d h a d i t s o wn counselpre sent. Zelln er w as gi ven a n opportunity t o prepar e a nd pre sent evi d en c e. H er ri ck tes ti fi ed on behal fo fthe Dist ri ct, an d Z ellner ca l l ed Connol l y a s a w itness to tes ti fy on hi s behal f about w hat happ ened in the Dece m ber20 m ee ting. Zel l ner chose to r ead a sta tem ent t o the Boa rd i nstea d ofte sti fyi ng. In hi s s tat em en t, Z e l l n e rn e i th e ro ffe r e d a n e x c u s e f o rh i s a c t i o ns on N ov em b er 6, n or d en i e d t h e c h ar ge s. H e m er ely sta ted, “Iam tr ulyso rr y fo r w hat happened, ” a nd “Ikno w I u sed poo rj udg m en t i n thi s ca se . Imade a m i st ak e an d i twi l ln e v e rh a pp e n a g a i n. ” ( I n hi s o r i g i na lc o m pla i nt, Ze l l ne rc l ai m s th at he ran th e se ar cht o r epo r t to the I T de pa r t men twh a ts t ud e nt s c o ul d a c c e s s v i a s c ho ol co m put er s. Howev er, b ecause he di dn’ t te st i fy, the Sc h ool Boar d neverhear d thi s v er si on o fev ents, o r whathi s i nt en t was i n a cc es si ngthe i m ag es . ) At the c on c l u sio n of th e h ea rin g, th e B oa rd d elib er at ed in cl o se d s es si o n fo ra few ho urs. Itc o ns i der ed va r i o us re pri m ands, and ul ti m ate l y dete rm i ned that ter m i nati o n was the a ppr o pr i at e co ur se o fa ct i o n. A fterthe Sc h oo lBoar d ter m i nated Zel l ner’ s e m plo ym en t, he fi led a gri ev an ce whi chwentt o a rbi tr at i o n. The arbitrators foun d that Zelln er viol ated the D istri ct’s Pol i cy, but re sci nd ed the ter m i nati on. The S chool Dis tr i ct re fused to abi de by the a rbi trati on deci si on. Zel l ner th enfi l ed a l aws ui t i n W i sc o ns i n Ci r cui t Cou r t se ek i ng c on firm at ion of th e a rb itr at ion aw ar d . B ot h t h e C irc u it12 N o. 10

- 2729 Cou r t an d th e W i sc o ns i n Co ur t o f Appeal s f o und tha t th e Scho ol Board’ s ter m i nati on w as supp or ted by j ust cause. The bot tom l i ne was thatthe arbi tr ato rs ’ award w as r e v e r s e d. Z e l l ne r ’ s t e r mi na t i o n wa s u ph e l d. Z ell ne r then fil ed this suit in federal c o u r t . Th e cou rt gr anted th e D i str i ct’ s m oti on t o dism i ss w i th r ega rd to Zel l ner’ s due pro cess cl ai m , fi nd i ng tha t h e f ai l ed to ple ad i t was vi rtual l y i m possibl e forhi m to fi nd new empl o y m ent
. S ubs eque nt l y, the c o ur t g r an te d the Dist ri ct’ s s um m ar y j ud gm ent m oti on with re spect to Ze l l ne r ’ s r emai ni ngF i r stAm en dm en t cl ai m , fi ndi nghe fai led to p rove th at his un ion activities w ere the “bu t for” cause ofhi s t er m i nati on, and th at h e f ai l ed to pro ve the N ove m ber 6 Googl e I m age sea rch w as a p h oney pr et ex tu alr ea so n fo rhi s te r m i na ti o n. W e r e v i e w deno vo the di str i ct c ourt ’ s g ra nt o fthe Distr i ct’ s F edera l Rul e o fCi vi lPro cedure 12(b) ( 6) m oti on t o d ism iss
. O pp v. O

ff iceof St at e’ s A tt orney of Co ok C ounty, 630 F. 3d 616, 61 9 ( 7th C ir. 20 10)

. To s urvi ve a m oti on to di s mi s s , th e p l a i n t i ffmu s td o mo r e i n th e c o mpl a i nt th ans i m pl y r ec i te e l ement s o fa c l ai m ; the “ co m pl aint m ust con tain suffi ci ent f actualm att er, acc epted as tr ue, to ‘st at e a cla im to relie f th at is p lau sib le on its fac e.’ ” A shc r of tv. Iq b al , 12 9 S

. Ct. 19 37, 19 49 ( 2009 ) ( quoti ng B el l A tl antic C orp. v. Tw om bly, 5 5 0 U
. S

. 5 4 4 , 5 7 0 ( 2 0 0 7 ) )

. We al so revie w t he di str i ct c ourt ’ s g ra nt o fsum m ar y j ud gm ent deno vo . Nems kyv . Co n oc oP hil l ips Co

. , 574 F
. 3d 859, 864 ( 7th Ci r. 20 09)

. S um m ar y j ud gm ent i s a pp ro pri ate wher e th e admi ss ibl e ev i den ce s ho ws th at “the r e i s no g enui ne di spu te a s to a ny mate r i alf ac t an d the mova ntN o. 10

- 2729 13 i s e nti tl ed to j ud gm ent a s a m att ero fl aw . ” F ed. R. Ci v. P . 56(a ). “A ge n u in e is su e o f m at er ial fa c t a ris es on ly i fsuffi ci ent e vi dence f avo rin g the no nm oving par ty e xi s t s t o pe r mi t a j ur y t o r e t urn a v e r di c t f or that party
. ” F aa s v . S e ars , Ro e b u c k & Co

. , 532 F. 3d 633 , 640

- 41 (7th C ir. 2008) (int erna l qu otation m arks om itted ). O n ap p ea l, Z elln er fir st a rg u es th at th e c ou rtinc or re c tly dism i sse d his due proc ess c laim bec ause i t di d so s ua sponte
. A co m pla i nt m ay be di sm i sse d fo r f ai l ure to sta te a c laim p u rs u an t t o Fe d . R. C iv. P . 12(b )(6) “o n ly if ‘it appe ar s be y o nd a do ubt thatthe pl aint i ffc anpr o ve no se t o f fac ts in s u p p or t o f h is c laim w h ich w ou ld en tit le hi m t o r e l i e f

. ’ ” Ricke t t s v. M i dwe s tNat i onal Bank, 874 F.2d 117 7, 1183 (7th Cir. 1989 ) (i nt erna l citations om itted ). Zel l ner cor re ctl y no tes thatwe do n ot enco urag e dist ri ct c ourt s t o dism i ss cl ai m s s ua s ponte. In s t e a d , we str ongl y e ncoura ge gi vi ng a part y noti ce o fan intenti on to d ism iss and an op p ortu ni t y t o resp ond

. Bu t Ze llne r’s ar gum ent m i sse s the m ar k. Even i fZel l ner w er e abl e t o prove “a ll o f the other el em ents n ecessar y t o m ake o ut a cl ai m o fst i gm ati zati on . . . the re m edy m andated

. . . i s ‘ an o pp or tuni ty to re fute th e c h arge’ ” a gainst hi m duri ng a hear i ng. Codd v. V elger, 429 U
. S. 624, 627 ( 1 9 7 7 ). Th e pu rp ose of a he a r i n g i s t o p r o v i d e th e p e r s o n “ c h a r g e d ” wi th a n o pp or tu n ity to cle ar h is n am e. Id

. Her e, Ze l l ne runque st i o nabl y r eceiv ed a hea ring and w as gi ven a n opportunity to c l e a r hi s na me. Th e S c ho o l Bo a r d he l d an o pen he ar i nga t whi chZe l lner was a l l o wed t o pr es en t evid en ce an d w itness es to te llhis si d e of th e story

—but14 N o. 10

- 2729 he de ci ded no t to t es ti fy . Ins tea d, he r ea d a s ta te m en t i n w h i c h h e d i d n o t d i s p u t e th e c h a r g e s a g a i n s th i m, b u t o n ly a p olo gi z ed . Ze lln er h as alre ad y re c eiv ed all the r el i efhe i s e nti tl ed to , and ther efo re hi s due pro cess cl ai m f ai l s. A s t o t h e su m m ar y j ud gm ent deci si on with re spect to hi s F i rs t Am endm ent c laim , Zel l ner ar gues that he es tabl i shed a prim a faci e case o fr eta l i ati on a s wel las ev i dence o fp r e t e x t
. T h e F i r s tA me n d me ntp r o h ib i t s a p u b l i c e mpl o y erfr o m r et al i at i nga g ains t ane m pl o y ee f o re ng ag i ng inp ro te c te d sp ee c h

. S e eC a l l a h a n v . F e r mon , 52 6 F

. 3d 10 40, 10 43- 44 ( 7th Ci r. 20 08)

. To m ake o ut a pr i ma f ac ie case o fFi rs t Am endm ent r eta l i ati on, a p lainti ffm ust pr es en t ev i den ce tha t: ( 1) h i s spe ec h was c o ns ti tu
ti onal l y pr ote cted; ( 2) he ha s su ffer ed a depri vati on l i kel y t o deterfre e s peech; an d (3 ) h is s peech was at l eas t a m ot iva tin g fa vo r inth e e m p loy er ’s a c ti o n . M as s ey v . Johns on , 45 7 F
. 3d 7 11, 71 6 ( 7th Ci r. 20 06)

. In other w or ds, the p l a i nt i ffb e a r s the b ur de n o fp r o v i ng“ b utf o r ” c a us atio n . G ross v . FB L F ina nc ia l Serv ices , Inc. , 12 9 S. C t. 2343 , 2350 ( 2009 ); F a i r l eyv . A n d r e ws , 5 78 F. 3d 518, 52 5- 26 ( 7th Cir

. 20 09) ( applying G ross t o F i r s tA me n d me n tc l a i ms un d er 42 U
. S. C

. § 1983). Once a pl ai nti ffdem onst ra tes thatan i m proper pur po se w as a m o ti va tingf ac to r, the b ur dens hi fts t o the d efe n dant to sho w thatthe sam e deci si on would have been m ade in the absence ofthe prot ecte d speech . M a ssey, 457F
. 3d at7 17

. I fthe de fen dan t ca r r i es tha t bur den, the p lai nt iff m us t the n d em ons trate th at th e d efend an t’s pr o ffer ed r ea so ns f o rthe de ci si o n wer e pr et ex tu ala ndN o. 10

- 2729 15 th at ret alia to ry an im u s w as th e re al re as on f o r t h e d ec isi on . Id

. At the s um m aryj udg m en t st ag e, thi s m ea ns a p lai nt i ffmustpr o duce e vi den ce upo n whi cha rational find er of fact cou ld infer that th e d efend an t’s p ro ffer ed rea so n is a lie. Vukadi novi ch v. Board of School Trustees , 278 F.3d 693 , 699 (7th C ir. 2002). Ze l l ne r ar g ue s th at th e hi st o r y o fa ni m o si tyb etwee n the U ni on a nd the Dist ri ct

— cul m in at i ng i n the Decem ber15 pu bl i cati on o fthe M il w auk eeJournal Se ntine l ar ti c l e, in w hi ch Zel l ner w as cri ti calo fthe Dist ri ct

— is a m p le su p p or t t h at “b u t f o r ” h is u n ion ac tiv itie s h e w ou ld not hav e been term inat e d . B u t “the f act th at a p lai nt iff’ s pr o te ct ed spe ec h may pr ec ede a n a dverse emplo y m en t deci sion alo ne does notes tabl i sh causa ti on. ” M ul l i n v . G etting er, 450 F.3d 28 0, 28 5 ( 7 t h C ir. 20 06 ). W h ile it is ab unda nt l y c l ea rtha t th e re l at i o ns hi p b etwee n the Uni o n a nd the Di st r i ctwas c o nt en ti o us , c o m ba ti ve , a nd mi s e r ab l e , a nd tha tZ e l l ne ra nd the Di s t r i c tp l a y e d a c en tralr ol e in the re l ati onshi p, Zel l ner i gnor es the di sc ov er y of h is N ov em b er 6 G oo gle Im ag e s ea rc h . I t is un d ispu ted that the s e arch viol ated the D istri ct’s Po l i cy, tha t Ze l l ne ra dm i tt ed th athe pe r form ed th e s e a r c h, a nd tha th e kne w h e v i o l a t e d the P o l i c y . Ac c o r di n g l y, th e S c h o o lB o a r d h a d a l e g i t i ma t e , n o n - d i s c r i mi natory r eas on t o ter m i nate Zel l ner’ s e m plo ym ent. Ze l l ne ra r g ue s th atthe o nl y r ea so n the Bo ar d ha d the i nfo rm ati on was bec ause Bork enhagen i m proper ly re

po rt ed hi s v i ol ati on t o H er ri ck i nstea d ofZel l ner’ s di re ct su p er vis or, G r i e g e r . B u t t h is a rg u m en t is a n on -st ar te r. It doesn’ t r eal l y m att erto wh om Bor ke nhagen r epor ted Zel l ner’ s co nd uct. Zel l ner vi ol ate d the Dist ri ct’ s Po l i cy16 N o. 10

- 2729 by view ing p ornogra p hic im ages on his sch ool com p ut er, the v i olat ion h ad nothi ng to do with hi s uni on a cti vi ti es, an d th e Sc h oo l B o a rd fou n d th at th is v iola tio n sh ou ld resu lt in term ination. A ccord ingly, the d istri ct cou rt co r r ec tly r ul ed th atno j ur y c o ul d fi nd tha t “butf o r ” th e ple thor a o fZel l ner’ s u ni on a cti vi ti es and stat em ents, th e S c h o o lB o a r d w o u l d n o th a v e t e r mi n a t e d h i s e mplo ym ent. Zel l ner’ s prim a faciec l ai m thus f ail ed on th e el emento fc au sa ti o n. M o r eo ve r, e ve n ifZe l l ne rha d pr o ve d c au sa ti o n, the b u r d e n s h i ft s t o th e D i s t r i c tt o s h o w th a t th e s a me deci si on would have b ee n m ade i n the abse nce o f Z elln er ’s u n ion ac tiv itie s. SeeValenti no v. Villa g e of South C hic ago Heigh ts, 575 F. 3d 664, 67 0 ( 7th Ci r. 20 09)

. H er e, Zel l ner runs into the s am e pr obl em

— he di rectly a nd kn ow ingl y v i ol ate d a S choolBoar d Pol i cy. H e a dm i tte d as m uc h i n fr o nto fthe Bo ar d a t hi s he ar i nga nd apol ogi zed for h is a cti ons. Zel l ner thus f ai l ed to es tabl i shpr o o ftha t the Go o g l e I m ag e se ar chwas a pr et ex t f orfirin g hi m . W i thout evi dence thatso m e o ther te achervi ol ate d the Pol i cy i n a s i m i l arway and re cei ved a m i l ders an ct io n, Ze l l ne r ’ s “b utf o r ” ca se r es ts o n c o nj ec tu re . A c c or d in gly , he ca n n otr e b u t th e D ist ric t’s legit im at e, no n- di sc r i m i na to r y r ea sonf o rhi s te r m i na ti o n. The j ud ge cor re ctl y g ra nted the Dist ri ct’ s m oti on f or s ummar y j ud g men twi th r e s pe c tt o Z e l l ne r ’ s F i r s tAmen dme n tc l a i m. Forthe f or ego i ng r eas ons, the j ud gm ent o ft h e d i str i ct cour t i s A FFI RMED .
4- 29- 11