UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, Thomas W. Earth, Intervening Appellee, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, Defendant-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• employee had no property interest in promotion because governing law gave “unfettered discretion to choose from among the five highest rated applicants”
• employee had no property interest in promotion because governing law gave “unfettered discretion to choose from among the five highest rated applicants”
• “Illinois law does not create an entitlement to a promotion [in public employment].”
• “It is folly for [the appellee] to assert that an appeals court on review of a district court judgment cannot consider the merits of each and every theory the district judge relied upon in de‐ ciding the case.”
• “It is folly for [a party] to assert that an appeals court on review of a district court judgment cannot consider the merits of each and every theory that the district judge relied upon in deciding the case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).