Duncan v. CITY OF ONEIDA, TENN.
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AS RENDERED FROM THE BENCH
ROBERT L. TAYLOR, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff, Larry M. Duncan, brought this action for denial of procedural due process in connection with his termination as a police officer with the City of Oneida, Tennessee. To be entitled to guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause, he must show that he had a property interest in continued employment at the time of his termination. The Supreme Court in Perry v. Sindermann, an opinion written by Mr. Justice Potter Stewart, defined the necessary interest as follows:
A person’s interest in a benefit is a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Perry v. SindermannSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Huddleston v. City of MurfreesboroTennessee Supreme Court · 1982
- Grant L. Parham, Jr. v. James L. Hardaway, Etc., Department of Education of the State of TennesseeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1977
- David Yashon, M.D. v. William E. Hunt, M.D.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Larry M. Duncan v. The City of Oneida, Tennessee, and Mack BurchfieldCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984
- Bush v. JohnsonDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1985