Theus v. Crews

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that officer’s interests outweighed police department’s, in part, because his statements were “brief’ and “calm” and because the other officers present “testified that [plaintiff] did not interfere with their staffing duties”
• noting that the seven factors need not all be addressed in turn
• finding that a court need not address each of the seven factors individually
• focusing on whether union representative’s objection to mandatory overtime “interfere[d] with [the employer’s] staffing duties”
• “If the objective of the speech is simply to further a purely personalized grievance, then the speech does not involve a matter of public concern.” (alteration marks and citation omitted)
• when the union president directed the union vice president to follow a formal grievance process and speak to management on behalf of union members the vice president spoke as a citizen, not as a public employee

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).