United States Eighth Circuit

Judgment as a matter of law for defendant-employer, an agency, in a First Amendment retaliation case is affirmed where: 1) there was no error regarding jury instructions; 2) the district court correctly concluded plaintiff's statements during a meeting in his supervisor's office did not deserve First Amendment protection; 3) the district court correctly concluded a letter by plaintiff did not touch upon a matter of public concern; and 4) even if plaintiff's speech did touch upon a matter of public concern, the Pickering balancing test weighed in favor of the agency.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/23/2006
• Published 06/23/2006

Judges

• RILEY, Circuit Judge., Before RILEY, MELLOY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Eli Karsh, argued, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Joel E. Anderson, argued, AAG, Jefferson City, MO, for appellee.