Patricia Spurlin’s lawsuit against Floyd County, Georgia, and several officials is getting a second chance. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has vacated the lower court’s dismissal of her First Amendment retaliation claims, sending the case back for further review. Spurlin alleges she was fired from her job at the Floyd County Elections Office for something she *didn’t* do – send an anonymous complaint about a coworker who was related to her supervisor.
The Backstory
Spurlin worked as an Election Clerk for Floyd County starting in May 2020. While technically employed through a temporary agency, Express Employment Services, the Elections Board oversaw her work. In September 2022, Akyn Beck became the Elections Supervisor and seemed pleased with Spurlin’s performance.
A couple of months later, Beck hired her fiancé’s brother, Isaiah Beck, as an equipment technician. Spurlin noticed that Isaiah wasn’t keeping regular hours, often arriving late, leaving early, or not showing up at all. She and her coworkers had to cover his duties. Spurlin also knew that Isaiah was reporting full-time hours and getting paid for them, with Akyn Beck approving his timecards.
Around March 14, 2023, another employee warned Spurlin that Beck was “livid” about an anonymous complaint sent to the County. Spurlin claims she didn’t write the complaint, but she knew someone was considering reporting Isaiah’s behavior to HR. Three days later, Spurlin was fired, with Beck telling her that her services were no longer needed.
The Lawsuit and Initial Dismissal
Spurlin sued Beck in her individual capacity, Floyd County Manager Jamie McCord in his official capacity, and Floyd County itself. She claimed First Amendment retaliation against Beck and McCord, and retaliation under the Georgia Whistleblower Act against the county. The district court dismissed the First Amendment claims, finding that Beck was protected by qualified immunity and that Spurlin hadn’t adequately stated a claim against McCord. The court reasoned that Spurlin hadn’t shown a clearly established constitutional violation because she hadn’t alleged any actions on her part that led to her termination. The state law claim was then dismissed without prejudice.
The Eleventh Circuit’s Ruling
The Eleventh Circuit disagreed with the district court’s reasoning. The core issue, according to the appellate court, is whether a government official violates the First Amendment when retaliating against an employee based on a *mistaken belief* that the employee engaged in protected speech, even if the employee did nothing to cause that mistaken belief.
The court cited the Supreme Court case *Heffernan v. City of Paterson* (2016), which established that an employer’s motive is what matters in a First Amendment retaliation claim. In *Heffernan*, a police officer was demoted because his supervisors mistakenly believed he was involved in a political campaign. The Supreme Court ruled that even though the officer wasn’t actually involved, the demotion was still unlawful retaliation because it was motivated by the *perception* of protected activity.
The Eleventh Circuit found that *Heffernan* clearly established that Spurlin could bring a First Amendment retaliation claim even if she didn’t actually send the anonymous complaint. The key is whether Beck fired Spurlin because she *believed* Spurlin had engaged in protected speech.
The court rejected the argument that *Heffernan* only applies if the employee engaged in some conduct that was *misperceived* as protected activity. The Eleventh Circuit stated that “the Heffernan Court’s holding did not turn on whether the employee had engaged in actual conduct but on improper employer motive.”
What Happens Next?
The Eleventh Circuit vacated the dismissal and remanded the case back to the district court. The district court must now consider whether the anonymous complaint would have been considered protected speech under the *Pickering* framework, which balances the employee’s right to speak on matters of public concern with the employer’s interest in maintaining an efficient workplace. If the complaint would have been protected speech, then Beck’s alleged retaliation could be a First Amendment violation, and she would not be entitled to qualified immunity.
The district court also needs to re-examine the claim against Floyd County Manager Jamie McCord, to determine if Spurlin has plausibly alleged that the county had a custom or policy that led to the violation of her constitutional rights. Finally, the district court should reconsider jurisdiction over the state law whistleblower claim in light of its findings on the federal claims.