Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill

Supreme Court of the United States · 1985 · Administrative Law

Administrative LawDue ProcessPublic Employmentprocedural due processpublic employeeproperty interestpretermination hearingnotice

Facts

Ohio law gave classified civil service employees tenure during good behavior and efficient service and permitted dismissal only for cause, with administrative review after discharge. Loudermill was fired by the Cleveland Board of Education for allegedly lying on his job application about a prior felony conviction, and Donnelly was fired by the Parma Board of Education after failing an eye examination; neither was given an opportunity to respond before termination. Both appealed through the Ohio civil service system, where Loudermill waited about nine months for an administrative decision and Donnelly was ultimately reinstated without backpay. They then brought federal actions alleging that the Ohio scheme was unconstitutional because it provided no pretermination opportunity to respond and, as to Loudermill, because the postremoval proceedings were too slow.

Issue

When a state public employee can be discharged only for cause and therefore has a property interest in continued employment, what process does the Due Process Clause require before termination? Also, did Loudermill's allegations about a nine-month administrative process state a separate due process claim based on posttermination delay?

Rule

Once state law creates a property interest in public employment, the Due Process Clause independently determines what procedures are required for deprivation of that interest. Due process requires, before termination, oral or written notice of the charges, an explanation of the employer's evidence, and an opportunity for the employee to present his side of the story; this pretermination hearing may be informal and serves as an initial check against mistaken decisions when followed by a full posttermination administrative hearing.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

The City of Toledo hires Nina Patel as a building inspector under a municipal civil-service code stating that classified inspectors hold their jobs during good behavior and may be removed only for neglect of duty, dishonesty, or other cause. After complaints about missed inspections, the city fires Nina immediately and tells her she can seek a full administrative appeal afterward.

If Nina sues claiming a denial of procedural due process, which argument best supports her claim?

Explanation. The majority held that a public employee has a protected property interest when state law secures continued employment absent cause for dismissal. Once that interest exists, due process requires some kind of pretermination hearing—at minimum notice, an explanation of the evidence, and an opportunity to respond—though not necessarily a full evidentiary hearing because fuller posttermination procedures may follow.