# Jefferson County Fiscal Court v. Peerce

> Kentucky Supreme Court · February 23, 2004 · 132 S.W.3d 824

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9630701

## Case

- **Full name:** JEFFERSON COUNTY FISCAL COURT; Jefferson County Corrections Department; Jefferson County Merit Board; David L. Armstrong, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Judge/Executive of Jefferson County; Ronald Bishop, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chief of Jefferson County Corrections Department; And Lee A. Karsner, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Captain of Jefferson County Corrections Department, Appellants, v. Thomas PEERCE, Appellee
- **Court:** Kentucky Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 23, 2004
- **Citations:** 132 S.W.3d 824; 2004 WL 314616
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Wintersheimer
- **Judges:** Keller, Wintersheimer, Cooper, Graves, Stumbo, Lambert, Fiscal, Winter-Sheimer, Johnstone
- **Cited by:** 46 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9630701

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing that immunity provided to state entities under Kentucky law does not apply to federal claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
- holding that county judge/executive’s decision to terminate former county corrections department officer was discretionary

## Opinion text

WINTERSHEIMER, Justice,
dissenting.
I must respectfully dissent from the disposition and analysis provided by the majority opinion in regard to qualified immunity. Here, qualified immunity is available because the constitutional rights of the plaintiff were not established by the enact *839 ment of a local county government ordinance. In this matter, we must apply federal constitutional law and analysis to a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case in this jurisdiction or in state courts. There has been created no federal constitutional right in a local government ordinance which addresses local merit board procedures. There is nothing in the ordinance cited which would meet the test of objective legal reasonableness to put the official on notice that a disagreement with the merit board at the time would amount to unconstitutional conduct. The ordinance does not clearly establish rights which are consistent with the Section 1983 analysis found in Mumford v. Zieba, 4 F.3d 429 (6th Cir.1993).
Accordingly, in the absence of a clearly recognized constitutional right which was established in the manner directed by applicable federal precedent, Jefferson County Judge Armstrong is entitled to qualified immunity. It would appear that at the time he was acting in the best interests of the county and the corrections department in regard to a very difficult employment matter. Armstrong, Bishop and Karsner are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9630701. Public record. Not legal advice.