Alpha Energy Savers, Inc., an Oregon Corporation Robert Obrist v. Diane Hansen Multnomah County Judy Swendsen

How courts have described this case

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

• holding “invidious discrimination” inherently a matter of public concern “whether it consists of a single act or a pattern of conduct”
• explaining that this Court has “held that when government employees speak about corruption, wrongdoing, misconduct, wastefulness, or inefficiency by other government employees, their speech is inherently a matter of public concern.”
• declining to adopt view that a “run of the mine single-plaintiff discrimination case” does not meet the public concern test
• stating that to prevail on a First Amendment retaliation claim 28 under § 1983, a plaintiff “must establish that (1) it engaged in expressive conduct that addressed a 1 matter of public concern; (2) the government officials took an adverse action against it; and (3
• recognizing “[w]hen a business 28 vendor operates under a contract with a public agency, [the Court] analyzes its First Amendment 2 retaliation claim . . . using the same basic approach that [the Court] would use if the claim had been 3 raised by an employee of the agency”
• extending the approach used for government employees and contractors to government vendors

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).