Peter Turner v. City & County of San Francisco, 788 F.3d 1206

Turner was hired by San Francisco DPW after civil-service exams but told on his first day he was a "temporary exempt employee," not a permanent civil-service hire; he alleges he would not have taken the job if he'd known.
Turner claims DPW manager Storrs and others misused temporary exempt status to perform core work, denied Turner promotion, and used hiring to favor handpicked, less-qualified workers.
Turner complained internally (staff meetings, union meetings, meetings with supervisors and HR) about unlawful hiring/use of temporary exempt employees and alleged a broader scheme to underbid work and misuse mapping fees.
After voicing concerns, Turner alleges he was punished (assigned menial map-checking), blocked from promotions, summoned to a hostile meeting, then fired; he claims retaliation and blacklisting.
Turner filed multiple amended complaints in state then federal court asserting, among other claims, a § 1983 First Amendment retaliation claim; the district court dismissed his claims with prejudice under Rule 12(b)(6) for failing to allege protected speech.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Turner engaged in "protected speech" as a public employee under the First Amendment	Turner argued his complaints about unlawful hiring/use of temporary exempt employees implicated matters of public concern (civil-service compliance, possible public fund misuse) and thus were protected	City argued Turner’s statements were internal, arose from private employment grievances, and did not address matters of public concern	Court held Turner’s speech was not protected — it was driven by personal personnel grievances and made in internal forums, not as citizen speech on public matters
Whether Turner pleaded facts sufficient for § 1983 retaliation under Rule 12(b)(6)	Turner contended he alleged facts supporting retaliation motivated by his complaints	City maintained the complaint lacked factual allegations showing protected speech and thus failed to state a claim	Court affirmed dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) — Turner failed to plead a plausible First Amendment claim

Connick v. Meyers, 461 U.S. 138 (speech by public employees is protected only when made as a citizen on a matter of public concern)
Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (distinguishing speech pursuant to official duties from citizen speech)
Desrochers v. City of San Bernardino, 572 F.3d 703 (speech about individual personnel disputes is generally not of public concern)
Coszalter v. City of Salem, 320 F.3d 968 (elements of a public-employee First Amendment retaliation claim)
Lambert v. Richard, 59 F.3d 134 (speech at a public forum and as a union representative can be protected)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard: factual content must permit reasonable inference of liability)