DISCHARGE CLAIMS
Springer v. Henry, No. 04-4124 (3d. Cir. Jan. 18, 2006)
The United States Court
of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that falsities in speech are protected
by the First Amendment unless made in a knowing or reckless manner and that
an employer did not have qualified immunity when her actions in termination
were reckless or intentionally malicious.
A psychiatrist’s contract was not renewed after he wrote five memoranda in which he criticized the policies, procedures and administration at the clinic at which he worked. The court found that although some of the documents contained one-sided views, none of the evidence demonstrated that the psychiatrist knowingly or recklessly made a false statement about the clinic. The court also found that the director of the clinic renewed all of the other physicians’ contracts except for the psychiatrist’s and the evidence supported the jury’s conclusion that the director acted maliciously toward this particular psychiatrist.