Correia v. Jones, No. 18-3625 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
After plaintiff was terminated, she filed suit against the President of Henderson State University for employment discrimination. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment for defendant, holding that plaintiff was an at-will employee at the time of her termination. In this case, passing a proposed budget including plaintiff's name, title, and salary, did not create an employment contract. Therefore, plaintiff had no property right in continued employment.
In regard to plaintiff's claim that she has a protected liberty interest in her reputation, which entitled her to a name-clearing hearing, the court held that plaintiff presented no evidence of defendant directly accusing her of stealing or mismanagement. Furthermore, any claims that plaintiff was stigmatized by innuendo or defendant's commenting on any part of the audit report failed. Therefore, plaintiff failed to establish that she was deprived of a protected liberty interest in her reputation.
Court Description: Erickson, Author, with Smith, Chief Judge, and Beam, Circuit Judge] Civil case - Employment discrimination. Plaintiff was an at-will employee of the university and the passage of a proposed budget including her name, title and salary did not create an employment contract for the upcoming school year; as a result, she had no property right in continued employment; with respect to plaintiff's claim that she had a protected liberty interest in her reputation and the right to a name-clearing hearing,in the absence of stigmatizing allegations, she could not establish that she was deprived of a protected liberty interest.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.