legal right or status will suffice to constitute a deprivation sufficient to state a claim under section 1983.”); see also Cotton v. Jackson, 216 F.3d 1328, 1330 (11th Cir.2000) (“[Wlhen reputational damage is sustained in connection with a termination of employment, it may give rise to a procedural due process claim for deprivation of liberty which is actionable under section 1983.”) (emphasis added); Dennis v. S&S Consol. Rural High School Dist., 577 F.2d 338, 342 (5th Cir.1978) (“[Sjtigma to reputation in conjunction with a failure to rehire a nontenured employee states a claim under § 1983 for deprivation of a Fourteenth Amendment liberty interest without due process.”) (emphasis added). Nor has he even contended that he was passed over for promotion. See Cannon, 250 F.3d at 1303 (<HOLDING>). In short, Smith has not alleged that he has
holding that reasonable reliance is not an element of the defense holding the connection is an element holding that showing damages caused by the failure to provide notice of transfer is a necessary element of a respa claim holding that a transfer or a missed promotion is not enough to establish the plus element of the stigmaplus test holding that second element of qualified immunity test is whether the law violated was clearly established