Opinion

Crystal Molina v. Brown County

  • 616 F. App'x 163
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Filed
Sep 22, 2015
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Reavley, Smith, Haynes
Nature of suit
Civil Rights
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

Case: 15-10354 Document: 00513202572 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/22/2015

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 22, 2015

No. 15-10354

Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

CRYSTAL MOLINA,

Plaintiff–Appellant,

versus

BROWN COUNTY; SHANE BRITTON,

Individually and in His Official Capacity as County Attorney;

SUZY YOUNG, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as Election

Administrator;

E. RAY WEST, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Brown County

Judge,

Defendants–Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:13-CV-48

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Crystal Molina, a former county employee, sued various county

employees in their official capacity under numerous theories, including, under

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

Case: 15-10354 Document: 00513202572 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/22/2015

No. 15-10354

42 U.S.C. § 1983, violation of her Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights, First

Amendment retaliation, and vindictive and bad-faith prosecution, and under

§§ 1985 and 1986, conspiracy to violate her rights. The district court granted

defendants’ motion for summary judgment in a succinct but sufficiently thor-

ough opinion dated March 17, 2015.

The court carefully explained, inter alia, that Molina made no showing

of a suspect county policy that resulted in the alleged violations and that any

retaliation was not in response to any speech that involved a matter of public

concern rather than in regard to her official duties as a public employee.

This case reflects a number of local squabbles but no indication of an

infringement of federally protected rights. The summary judgment is

AFFIRMED.

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.