racy L. Chambers v. Cherokee County

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedJuly 30, 2018
Docket18-11581
StatusUnpublished

This text of racy L. Chambers v. Cherokee County (racy L. Chambers v. Cherokee County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
racy L. Chambers v. Cherokee County, (11th Cir. 2018).

Opinion

Case: 18-11581 Date Filed: 07/30/2018 Page: 1 of 7

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________

No. 18-11581 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:17-cv-03239-LMM

TRACY L. CHAMBERS,

Plaintiff-Appellant, versus CHEROKEE COUNTY, LORI THOMPSON, JERRY COOPER, Defendants-Appellees.

__________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _________________________

(July 30, 2018)

Before MARCUS, NEWSOM, and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: Case: 18-11581 Date Filed: 07/30/2018 Page: 2 of 7

The district court granted Defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) Motions to Dismiss for

Failure to State a Claim and Plaintiff Tracy Chambers timely appealed. After

careful consideration, we affirm.

I

At the time that she filed her Amended Complaint, Chambers was a

Certified Employee Benefits Specialist with a Georgia insurance license and

worked for Defendant Cherokee County as a Benefits and Compensation Manager.

Among other tasks, Chambers’ duties included counseling and managing

employees regarding personnel-benefits matters, negotiating with brokers and

vendors regarding healthcare budgeting, analyzing benefits plans, and reporting

benefit-plan-related problems to the county commissioners.

According to Chambers’ Amended Complaint—the contents of which we

accept as true when reviewing the district court’s grant of defendants’ motion to

dismiss, see, e.g., Corsello v. Lincare, Inc., 428 F.3d 1008, 1012 (11th Cir.

2005)—Defendant Jerry Cooper, the Cherokee County Manager, “hired Defendant

Lori Thompson as the Human Resources Director for Cherokee County” even

though “Defendant Thompson had neither the training nor the experience for the

position.” Cooper then “ordered [Chambers] that she should not make any reports

to the county commissioners,” an order that “required [Chambers] to not carry out

her duties and not fulfill her fiduciary duty to the county.” Furthermore,

2 Case: 18-11581 Date Filed: 07/30/2018 Page: 3 of 7

“Defendants Cooper and Thompson began making demands on [Chambers] that

were improper and in some cases illegal,” and “[w]hen [Chambers] refused to

violate the law, Defendant Cooper began to harass her at work.” This alleged

harassment took the form of complaints about Chambers’ performance and

unwarranted withholding of a $5,000 raise. Finally, Thompson and Cooper

eventually terminated Chambers, the “published reason” for which “was that she

was guilty of violation of policy, unethical conduct, gross conflict of interest that

might rise to the level of theft, providing untruthful information for an employee,

and insurance fraud.”

Based on the above allegations, Chambers filed suit alleging the following

causes of action against Cherokee County, Thompson, and Cooper (together,

“Defendants”): (1) “conspiracy to deprive [Chambers] of her constitutional rights

to equal protection and due process of law”; (2) “depriv[ation] of [Chambers’]

rights to freedom of speech”; (3) violations of O.C.G.A. § 45-1-4, the Georgia

Whistleblower statute; (4) breach of contract; and (5) violation of Chambers’

“constitutional rights to due process and equal protection” because Defendants

made false criminal charges “in retaliation for [Chambers] filing the original

complaint.” In response, Defendants filed two Motions to Dismiss for Failure to

State a Claim—one from Cherokee County and one from Thompson and Cooper—

which the district court considered collectively and eventually granted.

3 Case: 18-11581 Date Filed: 07/30/2018 Page: 4 of 7

In granting Defendants’ 12(b)(6) motions, the district court determined that

Chambers had “fail[ed] to respond to Defendants’ equal protection, due process,

and conspiracy arguments” and had therefore abandoned those claims. Regarding

Chambers’ First Amendment argument, the district court determined that

Chambers “neither spoke as a citizen nor on a matter of public concern, barring her

from stating a First Amendment retaliation claim.” The court then declined to

exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Chambers’ two state-law claims (Counts 3

and 4—violation of a Georgia statute and breach of contract, respectively) and

dismissed them without prejudice. Chambers timely appealed.

II

“[T]his Court reviews de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim upon

which relief may be granted. On a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim,

we accept as true the facts as alleged in the complaint.” Corsell, 428 F.3d at 1012

(internal citations, quotation marks omitted).

A

The district court correctly determined that Chambers abandoned her equal

protection, due process, and conspiracy arguments by failing to address

Defendants’ contentions against them before the district court. See, e.g., Coal. for

the Abolition of Marijuana Prohibition v. City of Atlanta, 219 F.3d 1301, 1326

(11th Cir. 2000) (“The appellants’ failure to brief and argue this issue during the

4 Case: 18-11581 Date Filed: 07/30/2018 Page: 5 of 7

proceedings before the district court is grounds for finding that the issue has been

abandoned.”). 1 Moreover, Chambers’ opening brief on appeal fails to contest the

district court’s abandonment determination, providing this Court an alternative

ground to affirm the abandonment of those claims. See Sapuppo v. Allstate

Floridian Ins. Co., 739 F.3d 678, 680 (11th Cir. 2014) (“When an appellant fails to

challenge properly on appeal one of the grounds on which the district court based

its judgment, he is deemed to have abandoned any challenge of that ground, and it

follows that the judgment is due to be affirmed.”).

B

Nor did the district court err in dismissing Chambers’ First Amendment

argument for failure to state a claim. “[T]he law is well-established that the state

may not demote or discharge a public employee in retaliation for speech protected

under the [F]irst [A]mendment.” Bryson v. City of Waycross, 888 F.2d 1562, 1565

(11th Cir. 1989). But “[w]hen a citizen enters government service, the citizen by

necessity must accept certain limitations on his or her freedom.” Garcetti v.

1 Additionally, we disagree with Chambers’ assertion that because Defendant Cherokee County attached exhibits to its motion to dismiss (specifically, the exhibits contained certified copies of the County’s personnel policies manual, the notice of termination letter sent to Plaintiff, and the letter from County Manager Jerry Cooper to Plaintiff upholding Plaintiff’s termination the district court necessarily “violated the standard of review.” Br. of Appellant at 10-12. First, Chambers points to nothing in the district court’s opinion to suggest that the court relied on any material beyond Chambers’ Amended Complaint.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Crosby v. Paulk
187 F.3d 1339 (Eleventh Circuit, 1999)
Neal Horsley v. Gloria Feldt
304 F.3d 1125 (Eleventh Circuit, 2002)
Kirk S. Corsello v. Lincare, Inc.
428 F.3d 1008 (Eleventh Circuit, 2005)
Abdur-Rahman v. Walker
567 F.3d 1278 (Eleventh Circuit, 2009)
Garcetti v. Ceballos
547 U.S. 410 (Supreme Court, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
racy L. Chambers v. Cherokee County, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/racy-l-chambers-v-cherokee-county-ca11-2018.