Wallace v. Texas Tech Univ.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that speech about financial assistance and handling racial discrimination does not qualify as protected speech
• holding that Texas Tech and Texas Tech employees enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity and qualified immunity respectively against § 1981 claims
• holding that summary judgment was proper when a plaintiff basketball coach “produced no evidence that his association with the players was one entitled to constitutional protection”
• indicating that \speech made in the role as employee\ can be of public concern when it \involv[es] the report of corruption or wrongdoing to higher authorities\
• recognizing a difference in experience as a legitimate, nondiscriminatory justification and affirming summary judgment in favor of employer
• indicating that \speech made in the role as employee\ can be of public concern when it \involv[es] the report of corruption or wrongdoing to higher authorities\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).