Wiltsie v. Baby Grand Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the plaintiff was 22 not protected because he “chose to report the activity to his supervisor rather than the appropriate authorities” and was thus “merely acting in a private or proprietary manner”
• in a summary judgment motion, “the non-moving party [Oliver] is entitled to have the evidence and all reasonable inferences accepted as true”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).