Homar (P) was a police officer employed by D. P was arrested and formally charged with a drug-related felony. Upon learning of the arrest, D immediately suspended P without pay. A few days later, the criminal charges were dropped. About 3 weeks after the charges were dropped, D met with P to allow him an opportunity to tell his side of the story, but P was not informed of certain damaging statements (an alleged confession) attributed to him in the police report and so was unable to respond to those statements. P was subsequently informed in a letter that he was being demoted to the position of groundskeeper. P was allowed to return to work and got back pay for the time he was on suspension. A second meeting with D's president was held where P was provided an opportunity to respond to the charges. D sustained the demotion. P sued Ds for violation of due process of law in failing to provide him with notice and an opportunity to be heard before suspending him without pay. The District Court granted summary judgment for D. The Court of Appeals reversed, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.