Gustafson v. Jones

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiff adequately alleged that speech was a motivating factor “based on the timing” between plaintiff’s speech and defendant’s retaliatory conduct
• denying motion to dismiss First Amendment retaliation claims based on qualified immunity
• reversing dismissal of claims on qualified immunity grounds where 32 pleadings “show that the speech was on a matter of public concern and they do not reveal how the [employer] might go about showing its interest in nevertheless suppressing it”
• “[P]urely as a matter of good pleading practice, we think it preferable to leave to the defendant the burden of rais‐ ing justification [under Pickering] as an affirmative defense.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).