Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 12 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from United States v. Eulalio Moreno.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Eulalio Moreno Anchor | green | “rodriguez's raising of concerns about an incident that she witnessed at work with her employer's human resources department, rather than to the public, represents a chain-of-command complaint that it is ordinarily within the scope of every public employee's duty.” | 3 |
| 2 | Gwynn Lumpkin v. Aransas County, Texas | green | “interest in an efficient, harmonious work environment in its attorney's office outweighs two paralegals' interests in their speech.” | 3 |
| 3 | Stark v. University of Southern Mississippi | green | “at will employees have no constitutionally protected property interest in employment.” | 3 |
| 4 | Rogers v. Hall | green | “the court is not persuaded that it would have been objectively unreasonable for chief elbin to believe that cooksey was making his complaints within the scope of performing his official duties” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.