James R. Fuerst v. David A. Clarke

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that comments made by deputy sheriff as president of sheriffs’ union were “prima facie protected by the First Amendment as a contribution to political debate”
• concluding that the matter could not be resolved on summary judgment
• concluding that the matter could not be resolved on summary judgment
• county sheriff not entitled to summary judgment on First Amendment retaliation claim based on failure to promote
• “Because [an employee’s] comments that precipitated the adverse action taken against him were made in his capacity 16 as a union representative, rather than in the course of his employment as a deputy sheriff . . . [Garcetti] is inapposite.”
• “Because [an employee’s] comments that precipitated the adverse action taken against him were made in his capacity as a union representative, rather than in the course of his employment as a deputy sheriff . . . [Garcetti] is inapposite.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).