Melton v. City of Oklahoma City, 888 F.2d 724 (10th Cir. 1989). · Go Syfert
Search
Melton v. City of Oklahoma City, 888 F.2d 724 (10th Cir. 1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
44 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 9 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Melton v. City Of Oklahoma City (ca10, 1991-03-19)
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989 2007 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Melton v. City Of Oklahoma City
10th Cir. · 1991 · confidence medium
The case is REMANDED with instruction to enter judgment for the defendants on that claim. 84 LOGAN, Circuit Judge, with whom McKAY and SEYMOUR, Circuit Judges, join, dissenting: 85 This court granted en banc review limited to four issues which arise in liberty interest claims in an employment context, as follows: 86 "(1) Whether the district court committed plain error in instructing the jury that a liberty interest may be violated by charges which 'would stigmatize the employee's reputation or foreclose future employment opportunities'? 87 (2) Whether the district court committed plain error …
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Melton v. City of Oklahoma City
10th Cir. · 1991 · confidence medium
LOGAN, Circuit Judge, with whom McKAY and SEYMOUR, Circuit Judges, join, dissenting: This court granted en banc review limited to four issues which arise in liberty interest claims in an employment context, as follows: “(1) Whether the district court committed plain error in instructing the jury that a liberty interest may be violated by charges which ‘would stigmatize the employee’s reputation or foreclose future employment opportunities’? (2) Whether the district court committed plain error in failing to instruct the jury that before a liberty interest may be infringed, the charges m…
discussed Cited "see" Ospina v. Department of Corrections, State of Del.
D. Del. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
See Melton v. City of Oklahoma City, 879 F.2d 706 , 726-27 & nn. 32-33 (immunity defense raised at trial, in pre-trial order, and in answer), reh'g granted in part, 888 F.2d 724 (10th Cir.1989); Conner v. Reinhard, 847 F.2d 384 , 394 n. 8 (7th Cir.) (case had gone to trial), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 856 , 109 S.Ct. 147 , 102 L.Ed.2d 118 (1988); Lundgren v. McDaniel, 814 F.2d 600, 604 (11th Cir.1987) (defense raised injury instructions, in pre-trial stipulation, in motion for summary judgment, and in answer).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Pyramid Securities Limited v. Ib Resolution, Inc
D.C. Cir. · 1991 · signal: see also · confidence low
To constitute such a violation, the defendant must have acted with the “specific intent to impede the administration of justice”, Williams, 874 F.2d at 980; see also Melton v. City of Oklahoma, 879 F.2d 706 , 732 (10th Cir.), reh’g en banc granted on unrelated issues, 888 F.2d 724 (10th Cir.1989); United States v. McComb, 744 F.2d 555, 561 (7th Cir.1984), and there must have been “a pending judicial proceeding [which the defendant] knew of and sought to influence, impede, or obstruct”.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Raymon J. Melton, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant
v.
City of Oklahoma City, a Municipal Corporation, Lloyd A. Gramling, Chief of Police for the City of Oklahoma City, Gerald L. Emmett, Assistant Chief of Police for the City of Oklahoma City, Marvin Maxwell, Major, Oklahoma City Police Department, William R. Chambless, Major, Oklahoma City Police Department, Carl Smith, Lieutenant, Oklahoma City Police Department, Robert Taylor, Lieutenant, Oklahoma City Police Department, David McBride Lieutenant, Oklahoma City Police Department, and Paula Hearn, Assistant to the City Manager, Defendants-Appellants/cross-Appellees
85-1738.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Nov 3, 1989.
888 F.2d 724
Published

888 F.2d 724

Raymon J. MELTON, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant,
v.
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY, a municipal corporation, Lloyd A.
Gramling, Chief of Police for the City of Oklahoma City,
Gerald L. Emmett, Assistant Chief of Police for the City of
Oklahoma City, Marvin Maxwell, Major, Oklahoma City Police
Department, William R. Chambless, Major, Oklahoma City
Police Department, Carl Smith, Lieutenant, Oklahoma City
Police Department, Robert Taylor, Lieutenant, Oklahoma City
Police Department, David McBride, Lieutenant, Oklahoma City
Police Department, and Paula Hearn, Assistant to the City
Manager, Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees.

Nos. 85-1738 to 85-1742 and 85-1811.

United States Court of Appeals,
Tenth Circuit.

Nov. 3, 1989.

ORDER FOR REHEARING EN BANC

Before HOLLOWAY, Chief Judge, McKAY, LOGAN, SEYMOUR, MOORE, ANDERSON, TACHA, BALDOCK, BRORBY and EBEL, Circuit Judges, and SAFFELS, District Judge[*].

PER CURIAM.

1

Before the court are defendants'-appellants' petitions for rehearing with suggestion for rehearing en banc. Upon a vote of the panel members, see 879 F.2d 706, the petitions for rehearing are denied. A majority of the court's active judges, however, agree to rehear these cases en banc limited to the following issues:

2

1. Whether the district court committed plain error in instructing the jury that a liberty interest may be violated by charges which "would stigmatize the employee's reputation or foreclose future employment opportunities"?

3

2. Whether the district court committed plain error in failing to instruct the jury that before a liberty interest may be infringed, the charges must be found to be false?

4

3. Whether the plaintiff was entitled to a name-clearing hearing complete with the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses before the disciplinary review board, assuming dissemination of the perjury charges deprived plaintiff of a liberty interest?

5

4. Further assuming plaintiff is entitled to some sort of a hearing, need it be pre-termination, or would some post-termination hearing or name-clearing opportunity be adequate?

6

The clerk of court is hereby directed to enter the appropriate briefing and oral argument schedule.

7

SO ORDERED.

*

Honorable Dale E. Saffels, United States District Judge for the District of Kansas, sitting by designation