Court Opinion

ID: 9480823
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 07:59:49.026608+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:47:56.224191
License: Public Domain

CUDAHY, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I fully concur with Judge Sneed’s scholarly treatment of the question whether the Illinois statutes and regulations created a liberty or property interest in a prisoner’s not being fired from his job for disciplinary reasons. I am not persuaded, however, that there is no disputed question of material fact whether Wallace’s firing was for disciplinary, as opposed to administrative, reasons. In fact, the district judge observed that Wallace was fired because of the hooch incident. It may be that Wallace received all the process he was due, since he was allowed to appear before the Assignment Committee. Cf. Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460, 103 S.Ct. 864, 74 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983). I would attempt to decide the case on that basis or remand to the district court for a determination of the issue whether the discharge was disciplinary. I respectfully dissent to the extent indicated.