University of Houston v. Stephen Barth

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding there was no evidence of two of the elements in plaintiff’s Whistleblower Act claim and dismissing the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction
• the plaintiff’s evidence satisfied the subjective component of the good-faith inquiry where he testified that he believed the violations he reported “were violations of law”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).