Feldman v. Law Enforcement Associates Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that plaintiff “acknowledges that the acrimony began nearly two months before his first activity, and has offered no evidence that his conduct changed the bitter status quo in any way”
• explaining that we do not “sit as a kind of super-personnel department weighing the prudence of employment decisions”
• explaining that we do not \sit as a kind of super-personnel department weighing the prudence of employment decisions\
• explaining that we do not “sit as a kind of super-personnel department weighing the prudence of employment decisions”
• holding that a 20-month gap between a protected activity and a firing \weighs against a finding that it is more likely than not that the alleged protected activities played a role in [the whistleblower's] termination\ in a Sarbanes-Oxley Act whistleblower case
• explaining that courts do not “sit as a kind of super-personnel department weighing the prudence of employment decisions”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).