Mary Patrick Latham v. The Office of the Attorney General of the State of Ohio

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Rose “focuse[s] on how the speech would affect the employer’s ability to maintain a working relationship with his or her employees”
• noting that the plaintiff’s speech “could have made it difficult for her employer to trust her”
• assistant state attorney general was a category-three position because, although closely supervised, she was responsible for making policy recommendations to the state attorney general
• “where the inherent duties of the employee are broad and limited primarily by the discretion of the policymaker, it is likely that the employee is herself a confidential or policymaking employee under Elrod.”
• intraoffice nature of speech did not affect the application of Rose

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).