Full case name Behrens v. Pelletier End date 1996 | Citations 516 U.S. 299 (more) | |
Majority Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg Dissent Breyer, joined by Stevens People also search for Mitchell v. Forsyth, Harlow v. Fitzgerald | ||
Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299 (1996), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held a defendant's immediate appeal of an unfavorable qualified immunity ruling on a motion to dismiss does not deprive the court of appeals of jurisdiction over a second appeal, also based on qualified immunity, immediately following denial of summary judgment.
Contents
Background
The Federal Home Loan Bank Board fired Robert Pelletier (Plaintiff) as the provisional managing officer of Pioneer Savings and Loans Associations after the agent responsible for monitoring Pioneer’s operations, John Behrens (Defendant), recommended such action. The basis of Behrens recommendation was an investigation involving the collapse of another financial institution, and possible misconduct by Pelletier. Pelletier filled suite arguing wrongfully termination, and John Behrens claimed he was acting on behalf of the government and therefore was he was entitled to qualified immunity.
Issue
At issue is if a defendant's initial appeal for qualified immunity is unfavorable, does this ruling deprive the court of appeals jurisdiction of over a subsequent appeal based on the same claim, i.e., qualified immunity.