- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
TODD v. BISHOP
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plaintiff-Appellant Sean Todd appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee David G. Bishop in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that Bishop deprived him of a protected property interest in his continued employment with the Washington County Interagency Narcotics (WIN) Team without constitutionally sufficient due process.
Todd's assignment with the WIN Team was for a minimum of three years or until there was mutual agreement otherwise. Accordingly, Todd lacked a legitimate claim of entitlement to an assignment on the WIN Team beyond the three-year term he served. See Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577, 92 S.Ct. 2701, 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). Thus, he cannot establish a due process violation. See Engquist v. Oregon Dept. of Agric., 478 F.3d 985, 995-997 (9th Cir. 2007).
Because Bishop did not violate Todd's due process rights, the judgment is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
Alert