19 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1653, 19 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9247 Douglas Warren Webster, Cross-Appellant v. James F. Redmond, Cross-Appellees

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding anonymity unfair in the case with publicized allegations of sex discrimination against private firm given risk to defendant's reputation and revenues
• no deprivation where defendant’s action did not “bar him from continued employment with the [Chicago Board of Ed- ucation], let alone from the rest of the public educational sys- tem”
• no deprivation where defendant’s action did not “bar him from continued employment with the [Chicago Board of Ed- ucation], let alone from the rest of the public educational sys- tem”
• “If no protectable [sic] liberty or property interest is found to be implicated, no process is ‘due’ and no reasons or hearing need be given.” Id. But see, Board of Curators v. Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78, 98 S.Ct. 948, 55 L.Ed.2d 124 (1978

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).