Tonkovich v. Kansas Board of Regents

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed dismissal of Emil Tonkovich's remaining 42 U.S.C. § 1983 reinstatement claim against the University of Kansas Chancellor. The court held that its prior decision granting the individual defendants qualified immunity controlled under stare decisis and law of the case, and that Tonkovich had not alleged a due process or equal protection violation. The court also upheld dismissal without prejudice of the supplemental state-law claims and deemed the recusal issue moot.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to state a cognizable § 1983 claim for reinstatement because Tonkovich I held that the alleged conduct did not violate his procedural due process, substantive due process, or equal protection rights, and that holding controlled under stare decisis and the law-of-the-case doctrine.
2. The district court acted within its discretion in dismissing the supplemental state-law claims without prejudice after dismissing all federal claims over which it had original jurisdiction.
3. The recusal issue was moot because the court's disposition eliminated the federal and state claims from federal court, leaving no basis for the requested prospective relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the remaining official-capacity claim for reinstatement against the University Chancellor stated a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of substantive due process, procedural due process, or equal protection.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the supplemental state-law claims after dismissing all federal claims.
3. Whether the district court abused its discretion by declining to recuse, and whether reassignment was warranted.

Disposition

affirmed