Mason v. Seaton

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the plaintiff’s identification of specific fire code violations was sufficient to show “illegal activity” for purposes of the TPPA
• holding that “workplace safety . . . appears to be a matter of public concern in the State of Tennessee”
• concluding that plaintiff’s identification of specific code violations was sufficient evidence of illegal activities
• holding that the TPPA’s protection “extends to employees who have reasonable cause to believe a law, regulation, or rule has been violated or will be violated, and in good faith report it”
• holding that employee was able to satisfy the ―illegal activity‖ element of a retaliatory discharge claim where she had reasonable cause to believe that employer had violated a specific law and acted in good faith when reporting
• crediting the plaintiffs circumstantial evidence of her own good work history to support her claim of causation when the employer had offered no explanation for her discharge

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).