Gary Cleven v. Paul R. Soglin

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · September 10, 2018 · No. 17-3332

Summary

Gary Cleven, a stagehand for the City of Madison, sued under § 1983 alleging that the City's delay in reporting his hours to the Wisconsin Retirement System deprived him of five years of retirement without due process. The Seventh Circuit held that even assuming a property right was at stake, the availability of a state writ of mandamus provided an adequate postdeprivation remedy, satisfying due process under Parratt/Hudson. The court affirmed summary judgment for the City, noting that Cleven's failure to timely seek mandamus did not render the process inadequate.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Writing for the Court
Barrett, Circuit Judge; Bauer, Circuit Judge; Sykes, Circuit Judge
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
September 10, 2018
Docket number
17-3332
Procedural posture
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, No. 3:16-cv-00421-wmc, William M. Conley, J., granting summary judgment to defendants.
Standard of review
De novo review of summary judgment (implied)
Precedential value
published
Parties
Gary Cleven v. Paul R. Soglin, et al.
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

civil rightssection 1983due processsummary judgmentappellate procedure

Practice areas

Civil RightsConstitutional Law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the City's delay in reporting hours and wages to the Wisconsin Retirement System, in violation of a state Board order, deprived Cleven of procedural due process, given the availability of a state writ of mandamus as a postdeprivation remedy.

Holdings

  1. Even assuming the City's delay deprived Cleven of a property right, he was not denied due process because the state provided an adequate postdeprivation remedy in the form of a writ of mandamus.

Key quotations

Even assuming that the City’s delay deprived Cleven of a property right, he was not denied due process. According to Cleven’s account, the City disobeyed an order from a state entity when it failed to immediately report his hours and wages to the Wisconsin Retirement System. But if the City deviated from the procedure that state law required it to follow, Cleven’s right to obtain a writ of mandamus was an adequate remedy. We therefore affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the City. (2)
a plaintiff 'simply cannot refuse to pursue the available state remedies and then come into federal court complaining that he was not afforded due process.' (7)
It is difficult to conceive of how the State could provide a meaningful hearing before the deprivation takes place. (7)

Factual background

Gary Cleven, a stagehand for the City of Madison, was misclassified as an independent contractor and not enrolled in the Wisconsin Retirement System. After it was determined he was an employee, the Employee Trust Funds Board ordered the City to report his hours and wages. The City delayed reporting because of a dispute about who would pay Cleven's past-due employee contribution. Cleven eventually obtained a writ of mandamus compelling the City to report, but he sued under §1983 claiming that the delay deprived him of five years of retirement without due process.

Procedural history

Cleven filed a §1983 action alleging that the City's delay in reporting his hours and wages to the Wisconsin Retirement System violated his procedural due process rights. The district court granted summary judgment for the City, holding that the availability of a writ of mandamus provided adequate postdeprivation process.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…