of how the State could provide a meaningful hearing before the deprivation takes place.”) (internal quotations omitted); Lowe v. Scott, 959 F.2d 323, 340 (1st Cir.1992) (“[W]hen the state official is not acting pursuant to established state procedure, the state is not in a position to provide anything other than such postdeprivation remedies[.]”). Here, however, the decision to eliminate the Plaintiffs position followed an established state procedure. Because the Defendant had broad discretion under state law to deprive employees within the Machiasport School District of their property interest in continued employment, they also possessed the concomitant duty to ensure pre-deprivation procedural protections. Zinermon v. Burch, 494 U.S. 113, 135, 110 S.Ct. 975, 108 L.Ed.2d 100 (1990) (<HOLDING>). See Krennerich v. Inhabitants of the Town of
holding that claim against hospital regarding patients fall caused by defective footboard on hospital bed constituted health care liability claim holding claim of deprivation of right to competent mental health evaluation was procedurally barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal recognizing district courts power to admit evidence for a limited purpose holding that where employees at state mental health hospital had broad power to admit patients the constitution imposed on them a duty to see that no deprivation occurred without adequate procedural protections holding that the court had no power to sanction conduct that occurred in an arbitration