class-of-one theory is not legally cognizable where ... a public employee claims that she has been treated differently than other employees.”); Duprey v. Twelfth Judicial Dist. Court, No. CIV 08-0756 JB, 2009 WL 2105955, at *5 (D.N.M. June 22, 2009) (Browning, J.)(“In this case, Duprey, who is a public employee, is alleging that she was denied a promotion and was demoted. Because her lawsuit arises in the public-employee context, she cannot proceed on the class-of-one theory.”). Moreover, in these class-of-one claims, where discrimination is not alleged against a class of persons, “[t]he allegation that a plaintiff was treated differently from those similarly situated is an essential element of an equal protection action.” Hennigh v. City of Shawnee, 155 F.3d 1249, 1257 (10th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>)(citing Norton v. Vill. of Corrales, 103 F.3d
holding that a plaintiff who did not show that he was paid at a lower rate than similarly situated employees could not survive summary judgment holding that to assert a viable equal protection claim plaintiffs must first make a threshold showing that they were differently treated from others who were similarly situated to them holding that the plaintiff who alleged he was subjected to discipline and a disciplinary proceeding not applicable to any other police officer under the collective bargaining agreement but not alleging any classbased discrimination failed to state a claim as the plaintiff did not show how he was treated differently from others similarly situated emphasis added holding that caucasian employees who engaged in the same act as the plaintiff but it did not result in injury to others were not similarly situated holding that black residents failed to state an equal protection claim where they did not allege the existence of a similarly situated group of white residents who were treated differently