A federal judge from the Northern District of Illinois has denied the summary judgment motion of a former coach, who sued his school district after it hired him and then fired him weeks later after learning of his checkered past.
The plaintiff in the instant case is Fred Jacobeit, who began working for the Board of Education of Rich Township High School District 227 in 1978. In the three decades since he was hired, he has worked in 17 different coaching positions, receiving numerous awards for his performance.
In 2007, Jacobeit applied to become the assistant coach of the girls’ basketball team at Rich Central High School. He spoke to Will Dwyer, the school’s athletic director, who was “excited to learn” of his interest, according to the court. After an interview on October 19, 2007, Dwyer told Jacobeit that he had been selected. Jacobeit accepted the position and began coaching. He was listed as the assistant coach in a handbook distributed to student players and was given an electronic key fob allowing him access to the appropriate facilities. Principal Rainey executed a “Recommendation for Hire Form” prepared by Dwyer and sent it to Selma McDonald, District 227’s human resources director. McDonald executed the form on November 13, 2007, and sent it to the District’s Superintendent, Howard Hunigan.
In the meantime, Rainey decided that Jacobeit should not be hired and told Dwyer to instruct Jacobeit to stop coaching. Rainey had been confronted by parents who claimed that Jacobeit had engaged in racially insensitive behavior when coaching another high school’s basketball team during the 2005-2006 season. The allegation was that Jacobeit, who is white, gave charged gag gifts, including “black tar baby” dolls, to members of the predominantly African-American team. That incident had been publicized, with Jacobeit maintaining that the alleged “tar baby” doll was in fact a hooded Star Wars figure given to a student who regularly wore a hood at school. The authorities apparently believed Jacobeit, who was not disciplined. Rainey nonetheless pressed forward; he asked Superintendent Hunigan to rescind the Recommendation for Hire Form, and Hunigan complied.
On November 13, 2007, Dwyer told Jacobeit that the offer had been rescinded. District 227 approved a payment to Jacobeit to compensate him for the time he spent coaching. The teacher’s union filed a grievance, and the arbitrator found that District 227 had entered into a contract with Rainey to fill the coaching position and had breached that contract by removing him. Jacobeit formally retired from the District in 2008. Although he did not apply for any other coaching positions in District 227, Jacobeit admits that he later applied for and received a position as an assistant basketball coach at a high school in another district, according to the court.
He ultimately sued the district and Maceo M. Rainey, the principal of Rich Central High School, under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.; and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. The § 1983 claims allege violations of Jacobeit’s equal protection and procedural due process rights. Earlier in the litigation, the court dismissed the Title VII claim against Rainey and the § 1983 claim against Rainey in his official capacity. 673 F. Supp. 2d 653 (N.D. Ill. 2009). Jacobeit has also given up his ADA and ADEA claims.
The instant dispute centered on Jacobeit’s motion for summary judgment on his due process claim.
The court reviewed specifically Jacobeit’s allegation that he was deprived, without due process, a protected property interest in continued employment as the assistant girls’ basketball coach at Rich Central. Jacobeit also alleged that the District and Rainey deprived him of a protected occupational liberty interest by appearing to credit the extremely damaging notion that Jacobeit had engaged in racially insensitive behavior during the 2005-2006 basketball season. Both aspects of Jacobeit’s due process claim are considered in turn.
Considering the property interest claim first, the court wrote that “Jacobeit is not entitled to summary judgment on his deprivation of property claim because the record, with all reasonable inferences drawn in the District’s favor, would permit a reasonable jury to find that Jacobeit worked as an at-will employee in his capacity as assistant girls’ basketball coach at Rich Central.”
The occupational liberty interest argument failed as well.
“As an initial matter, contrary to Jacobeit’s submission, Superintendent Hunigan did not rule out hiring Jacobeit again,” wrote the court. “In any event, even if District 227 would never again have hired Jacobeit to coach, Jacobeit admits that he sought and found employment as a coach in another district. Given this, a reasonable jury could find against Jacobeit on the occupational liberty component of his § 1983 due process claim.”
Fred R. Jacobeit v. Rich Township High School District 227 and Maceo M. Rainey; N.D. Ill.; 09 C 1924, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42321; 3/28/12
Attorneys of Record: (for plaintiff) Laurie Marie Burgess, LEAD ATTORNEY, Burgess Law Offices, P.C., Chicago, IL; Lori Ann Benavides, Levy Phillips & Konigsberg, LLP, New York, NY. (for defendant) Jacqueline Marie Litra, Paulette A. Petretti, Scariano, Himes and Petrarca, Chtd., Chicago, IL; Jeffrey S. Taylor, Mark A Lichtenwalter, Tricia Mary Pellegrini, Spesia, Ayers & Ardaugh, Joliet, Il; Paul J. Ciastko, Scariano, Himes and Petrarca, Chicago, IL.
