Luckritz civil suit dismissed

By Danica Baker
Herald Staff Writer

September 25, 2008 11:18 am

— CAMANCHE — Chief Judge Robert W. Pratt, of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, has dismissed all counts of a civil complaint filed by former Camanche police officer Patrick Luckritz.
Luckritz was fired by Police Chief Bob Houzenga on June 29, 2006, for six stated reasons including conduct unbecoming an officer, violation of departmental policy, neglect of duty and three counts of insubordination. Luckritz appealed the firing to the Civil Service Commission, seeking to be fully restored to his previous rank and be given back pay and benefits.
His case was heard by the commission on Sept. 5, 6 and 7, 2006.
On Sept. 13, 2006, the commission decided to modify the termination by reinstating Luckritz, but demote him to patrolman first class. Luckritz was placed on one year of probation and was to be reviewed in writing every three months during the probation period. He also was given a 30-day suspension without pay and benefits from the date of his termination and ordered to issue a formal apology to Clinton County attorney Mike Wolf and first assistant Clinton County attorney Ross Barlow. The city appealed the Civil Service Commission’s reinstatement decision, asking that the court overturn the ruling and terminate Luckritz for good.
In January 2007, Luckritz claimed a violation of his civil rights and filed a civil lawsuit in U. S. District Court against the city of Camanche, Camanche Police Chief Robert Houzenga, Wolf, Barlow and the Clinton County Attorney’s Office.
In the civil lawsuit, Luckritz claimed the ban from the County Attorney’s Office interfered with his ability to perform his duties as a police officer and his right of continued employment or caused his employment to be terminated.
He asserted that his discharge was a “reprisal for disclosure of information” to the Iowa Attorney General’s Office and the Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board and alleges that his firing violates Iowa code 70A.29, the “whistleblower’s act.” Similar allegations to the Iowa Attorney General, and the Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board were dismissed.
Further, Luckritz claimed that his communications to the Attorney General and Disciplinary Board constituted free speech protected by the First Amendment and Barlow and Wolf intentionally interfered with Luckritz’s contractual relationship with the city of Camanche, entitling him to punitive damages.
Several of the parties to the civil lawsuit were represented in the case by Attorney Mike Walker of Hopkins and Huebner of the Quad-Cities.
In June 2007, a Clinton County District Court judge reversed the decision of the Camanche Civil Service Commission and ruled the termination of Luckritz was justified. Luckritz appealed the court’s ruling to the Court of Appeals, which issued a ruling in July and found the record established Luckritz was guilty of neglect of duty, misconduct, and insubordination.
Recently, the Iowa Supreme Court denied to hear or issue a ruling in the case. Luckritz requested the Iowa Supreme Court perform a discretionary review of his case. The court declined the request. Camanche City Attorney Tom Lonergan said Luckritz could appeal to the United States Supreme Court if questioning the constitutionality of the case.