| http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#value | - We held further that once Doyle had shown that his conduct was constitutionally protected, and that this conduct was a 'substantial factor' . . . in the Board's decision not to rehire him, the school board was obliged to show by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have reached the same decision as to respondent's reemployment even in the absence of the protected conduct.
|
