Velocity Invests., L.L.C. v. Kunzler

How courts have described this case

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

• noting deference to “employers’ reasonable interpretations of employee speech and predictions of disruption” especially where an internal investigation into the conduct has occurred
• “[A]n employer must still establish likely disruption through record support, and courts have long required more than ‘unadorned speculation as to the impact of speech.’”
• “[S]peech touching on race relations is ‘inherently of public concern.’” (quoting Connick, 461 U.S. at 148 n.8)
• \[T]he 'inappropriate or controversial nature' of the speech . . . is only a factor in evaluating its disruptiveness during Pickering balancing.\ (quoting Munroe v. Cent. Bucks Sch. Dist., 805 F.3d 454, 470 (3d Cir. 2015)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).