Katzberg v. Regents of University of California

Summary

The California Supreme Court considers whether a plaintiff may recover monetary damages for an alleged violation of the due process liberty interest protected by article I, section 7(a) of the California Constitution, absent statutory authorization or an established common law tort. Richard Katzberg alleged that the University of California stigmatized him when removing him as a department chair and failed to provide a timely name-clearing hearing. The court concludes that damages are not available for the asserted constitutional violation.

Holdings

1. Money damages are not available directly under article I, section 7, subdivision (a), to remedy the alleged deprivation of Katzberg's due process liberty interest under the facts presented.
2. Courts must first determine whether the constitutional provision's text, history, drafting materials, voter materials, guidelines, mechanisms, procedures, or common-law antecedents demonstrate an affirmative intent to authorize or withhold damages. If no such intent appears, courts may consider whether to recognize a constitutional tort by examining the adequacy of alternative remedies, the effect on established tort law, the nature and significance of the constitutional provision, and any special factors counseling hesitation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a plaintiff may recover money damages directly under article I, section 7, subdivision (a), of the California Constitution for an alleged due process liberty-interest violation when no statute or established common-law tort authorizes the remedy.
2. What framework governs determining whether a state constitutional provision authorizes or supports a damages action.
3. Whether the availability of a name-clearing hearing, declaratory or injunctive relief, writ of mandate, and defamation damages precludes recognition of a constitutional tort remedy in these circumstances.

Disposition

affirmed