Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
David Pilver v. Hillsborough County, Florida, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 17-10058 · judgment October 3, 2017
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
Essentially: Does the Eleventh Circuit's "discharge or more" rule in public employee defamation cases, which conflicts with other circuits' due process decisions, too narrowly restrict the 14' Amendment via 42 U.S.C. § 1983? Can a circuit ignore an explicit state law property interest in deference to its own severity measure rule when deciding if due process has been violated? Does a court's refusal to entertain First Amendment arguments after a plainly stated claim of retaliation after whistle-blowing, or to engage a custom orpolicyexamination despite a robust fact pattern, meet the obligations of a "liberally construed" and "less stringent" standard and Federal Rule 8(e)? Should agency action taken without the jurisdictional authority to act trigger substantive due process review, acting as a threshold question before further prececlentiall metrics can be reached?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
David Pilver Jr.
For respondent
Stephen Mark Todd
Hillsborough County Attorney's Office
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- May 29 2018Petition DENIED.
- May 08 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/24/2018.
- May 03 2018Waiver of right of respondents Hillsborough County, et al. to respond filed.
- Feb 05 2018Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 21, 2018)