Kars 4 Kids Inc v. America Can Cars For Kids

Oral argument

• Argued

  38 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing cases where “circumstantial evidence created a genuine issue of material fact” at summary judgment
• affirming summary judgment because no evidence contradicted the defendant’s declaration that he was unaware of protected speech and, therefore, there was no evidence that the speech was a motivating factor
• discussing the types of evidence that may support an inference of retaliatory motive
• “[S]ummary judgment decisions with regard to § 1983 claims are remarkably similar to their Title VII counterparts.”
• protected speech that naturally “‘engender[s] some hostility and resistance” cannot be limited on account of the disruption that naturally follows (citation omitted)
• “Mere opinions and beliefs that [a defendant’s] actions were retaliatory, based on no specific or substantial evidence, are not enough to create a genuine issue of material fact on the issue of pretext.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).