Here’s an updated version of the article from CookCountyrecord.com:
In a recent decision, a federal appeals court upheld the dismissal of a firefighter who was terminated for failing to comply with the residency requirements set by the Village of Melrose Park. The court rejected the firefighter's claim that his termination breached his constitutional due process rights. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago confirmed the lower court's dismissal of both Cannici's due process and equal protection claims.
John Cannici, a former Melrose Park firefighter, was let go after it was discovered that he wasn’t residing full-time in the village, contrary to the local residency ordinance. According to Melrose Park’s municipal code, all employees of the village, except those specifically exempted, are required to live within the village limits.
The judges noted that Melrose Park followed the procedures mandated under Illinois law for just cause dismissals, which include providing written charges, holding a hearing, and allowing the presentation of evidence before firing an employee. Cannici initially resided in Melrose Park until 2008, when he moved to Orland Park to buy a house with his wife and two children. However, Cannici continued to stay in Melrose Park during work hours and only returned to his family on weekends, which the Village’s Fire and Police Commission deemed a violation of their residency rules.
Regarding Cannici’s argument that the administrative review had deprived him of due process, the court sided with the Village. As stated in the decision by Judge William J. Bauer, “Cannici’s counsel informed us that a state court judge found in favor of Cannici on the administrative review claim and suspended further proceedings pending the outcome of this appeal. Therefore, we see no indication that Cannici’s due process rights were compromised.â€
The court also dismissed Cannici’s equal protection claim, referencing a previous Supreme Court ruling that clarified the Equal Protection Clause is not applicable when government employers make subjective, individualized personnel decisions, even if they appear arbitrary or irrational. Consequently, the court concluded that Cannici’s argument under the Equal Protection Clause lacked merit.
Thanks Dan!
This case highlights how local governments can enforce residency requirements for public employees, provided they follow proper legal protocols. It also underscores the importance of adhering to such regulations to avoid potential legal challenges.
Mould Trim Line,Injection Molding Inserts, Insert Overmolding, Insert Molding Process, Insert Moulding
Dongguan Hao Chen Precision Industry Co., Ltd. , https://www.howmolds.com