Skip to main content
Second Circuit· 8/8/2014

Nielsen v. AECOM Technology Corp.

Citations

  • 762 F.3d 214
  • 38 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1453
  • 2014 WL 3882488
  • 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 15320
  • 98 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 45,126

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 reasonable belief cannot be “wholly untethered” from the statutory provisions at issue
  • noting plaintiff abandoned certain claims in part because he failed to “oppos[e] the motion to dismiss on [those] issue[s]”
  • affirming dismissal of whistleblower claim for failure to allege facts supporting reporter’s objectively reasonable belief that reported conduct violated federal law
  • listing “perceived misconduct in ,.. accounting practices” among examples of well-pleaded allegations of conduct that an employee might reasonably believe violates the securities laws
  • applying Skidmore deference but noting that “the purported whistleblower’s belief cannot exist wholly untethered from [the specific provisions allegedly violated]”
  • adopting ARB interpretation of whistleblower retaliation provision of the 15 violate a federal railroad safety edict, he has engaged in FRSA-protected activity. See id. at . The Cieslicki holding comports with subsection(a)(2)’s plain text. See § 20109(a)(2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hall, Livingston, Sack

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

39 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.