Kenneth D. Colburn, Jr. And Robert M. Khoury v. Trustees of Indiana University, Glenn W. Irwin, Jr., Howard G. Schaller

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a de facto reappointment guaranteeing continued employment would be contrary to the University's written policy for tenure
• “exposing wrongdoing within a public entity may be a matter of public concern.”
• court must determine whether the speaker is speaking “more like a citizen or a disgruntled employee whose statements are primarily of personal interest.”
• “[plaintiffs] cannot leave it to this court to scour the record in search of factual or legal support for this claim”
• “A property interest is not established by general statements in handbooks, appointment documents or elsewhere that an employee will be judged based on some ‘criteria.’ ”
• “Plaintiffs[,] [in letters of concern to a university’s dean,] were not speaking primarily as citizens, but as faculty members concerned about the private matter of the processes by which they were evaluated.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).