University librarian cannot pursue constructive discharge claim where book recommendation created controversy
Scott Savage, a librarian at THE ohio state university, brought a constructive discharge case in Federal Court, arguing that his book recommendation created a controversy that resulted in his constructive discharge and a violation of his First Amendment right of free speech. Savage had become embroiled in a brouhaha over whether the book assigned as reading for all freshman should be either "uncontroversial" or at the forefront of a disputed current event. Initialy, he suggested that the book assigned should not raise controversial issues, but later he recommended several books, one of which was deemed inappropriate by several faculty members. A series of faculty cross-complaints followed, which THE ohio state university dismissed.
Nevertheless, Savage took a leave of absence, citing "extreme emotionial distress" and later filed two civil actions against THE ohio state university in State Court. When those cases were not resolved to his satisfaction, he filed the instant civil rights action in federal court. The Sixth Circuit held that his rights had already been adjudicated in Ohio State Court and that since his speech on this topic was job-related, it did not carry First Amendment implications. As for Savage's claim that his job-related speech resulted in a constructive discharge, the Court held that his employment conditions were not "objectively intolerable" and that THE ohio state university did not intend for him to quit, given that he had the clear support of his supervisors.