×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
$210,000 Awarded Indiana Guard for Retaliation by Supervisors
An Indiana federal jury awarded guard Nancy Spiegla $210,000 in a lawsuit
alleging retaliation for her protected speech rights. Spiegla had worked
at Indiana's Westville Correctional Facility since 1985. She was known as
a stickler for applying rules, and for years worked gate duty.
On January 13, 2000, Spiegla observed Major Edward Hull and another guard
fumbling in the trunk of a vehicle outside gate. Because all cars are
subject to search upon entry into the prison, and Spiegla suspected the
trade of contraband may be involved, she began a routine search of the car.
Hull told her there would be no search because it was a state vehicle.
While that wasn't procedure, Hull outranked her and no search occurred.
Four days later, Spiegla was taken off the gate and assigned to a less
desirable shift. Thinking the reassignment was retaliation for having had
the temerity to challenge Hull's authority and subject him to the rules,
Spiegla filed suit. The district court granted the defendants summary
judgment, but the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. See: Spiegla
v. Hull, 371 F.3d 928 (2004).
At trial, the defendants (Hull, Superintendent Herb Newkirk, and his
right-hand man Bernard Johnson) contended Spiegla was simply transferred
with no reprimand or pay cut. Moreover, they contended no retaliation
occurred because the transfer order was generated on January 11, 2000, or
two days before the Hull incident. At trial, Hull remembered the gate
incident occurred on January 6.
The jury found for Spiegla, awarding her $70,000 in damages against each
defendant. The defendants have appealed. See: Spiegla v. Indiana
Department of Corrections, USDC, Indiana, Lafayette, Case No. 4:01-75.
alleging retaliation for her protected speech rights. Spiegla had worked
at Indiana's Westville Correctional Facility since 1985. She was known as
a stickler for applying rules, and for years worked gate duty.
On January 13, 2000, Spiegla observed Major Edward Hull and another guard
fumbling in the trunk of a vehicle outside gate. Because all cars are
subject to search upon entry into the prison, and Spiegla suspected the
trade of contraband may be involved, she began a routine search of the car.
Hull told her there would be no search because it was a state vehicle.
While that wasn't procedure, Hull outranked her and no search occurred.
Four days later, Spiegla was taken off the gate and assigned to a less
desirable shift. Thinking the reassignment was retaliation for having had
the temerity to challenge Hull's authority and subject him to the rules,
Spiegla filed suit. The district court granted the defendants summary
judgment, but the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. See: Spiegla
v. Hull, 371 F.3d 928 (2004).
At trial, the defendants (Hull, Superintendent Herb Newkirk, and his
right-hand man Bernard Johnson) contended Spiegla was simply transferred
with no reprimand or pay cut. Moreover, they contended no retaliation
occurred because the transfer order was generated on January 11, 2000, or
two days before the Hull incident. At trial, Hull remembered the gate
incident occurred on January 6.
The jury found for Spiegla, awarding her $70,000 in damages against each
defendant. The defendants have appealed. See: Spiegla v. Indiana
Department of Corrections, USDC, Indiana, Lafayette, Case No. 4:01-75.
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Spiegla v. Indiana Department of Corrections
| Year | 2005 |
|---|---|
| Cite | USDC, Indiana, Lafayette, Case No. 4:01-75 |
| Level | District Court |
| Conclusion | Jury Verdict |
| Attorney Fees | 0 |
| Damages | 210000 |
| Injunction Status | N/A |