Hanna v. Herman

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that disclosure to an officer within another department of the plaintiffs agency “would be covered by the “need to know” exception as a matter of law.”
• “Plaintiff must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he made a protected disclosure, that subsequent to the disclosure he was subject to disciplinary action, and that the disclosure was a contributing factor to the personnel action taken against him.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).