David Kristofek v. Village of Orland Hills

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “motive alone does not conclusively determine whether a public employee’s speech involves a matter of public concern”
• finding that plaintiff stated a plausible claim that a police chief “had at least de facto authority to set policy for hiring and firing”
• explaining that speech involves a matter of public concern “if an objective of the speech was also to bring about change with public ramifications extending beyond the personal”
• noting that the plaintiffs “rather aggressive reaction” of going to the FBI with his suspicions, in addition to making internal complaints, suggested that he was not solely concerned with his personal interest but was also motivated by a desire to help the public
• reversing dismissal of claim where plaintiff not only made internal complaints regarding what he perceived to be the unlawful release of a driver from custody “because [the driver’s] mother was politically connected,” but also consulted an attorney, as well as the FBI
• “[I]f an objective of the speech was also to bring about change with public ramifications extending beyond the personal, then the speech does involve a matter of public concern.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).