People v. Tyjhe H.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that hospital would have taken same “en tirely appropriate” actions concerning plaintiffs alleged misconduct even absent plaintiffs protected speech
• recognizing that an employer’s implementation of “recommendations of an independent outside reviewer undermines any inference that the action was motivated by retaliation”
• holding, in First Amendment case, that required training was not sufficiently adverse to support retaliation claim, applying more expansive definition of “adverse” than applies in Title VII disparate treatment claims
• considering whether alleged employment actions were sufficiently adverse to sustain a speech-based First Amendment retaliation claim
• discussing how Burlington Northern broadened the scope of adverse actions for retaliation claims
• “The test in Burlington Northern is also consonant with our First Amend- ment employment retaliation cases. . . . Additionally, the test in Burlington Northern is analogous to the standard articulated by sev- eral other circuits in the First Amendment context.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).