Cir.1989) (“The definition of ‘matters of public concern’ is imprecise.”)). 116 . Denton v. Morgan, 136 F.3d 1038, 1043 (5th Cir.1998). 117 . Docket no. 49, Andrade’s Declaration, Exhibit 12, at 4 & 6. 118 . Id., Andrade’s Declaration, Exhibit 12, at 11-12. 119 . See Rankin, 483 U.S. at 384, 107 S.Ct. 2891 ("Vigilance is necessary to ensure that public employers do not use authority over employees to silence discourse, not because it hampers public functions but simply because e for the illegal actions of a city police chief in connection with the disposition of seized private property where the city had delegated responsibility for the property to the chief); and Crowder v. Sinyard, 884 F.2d 804, 829 (5th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 496 U.S. 924, 110 S.Ct. 2617, 110 L.Ed.2d 638 (1990) (<HOLDING>). 170 . See Sanders v. English, 950 F.2d 1152,
holding that citys enforcement of the entire state penal code would not constitute a city policy because the city was required to follow state law holding that a jurys finding that a city had delegated its final policymaking authority in the area of law enforcement to a city police chief was supported by the evidence and warranted imposing liability upon the city holding that city attorneys promise in an oral settlement agreement for city to annex and rezone land was within the legal authority of the city of joliet to accomplish and were not absolutely void acts per se therefore city could be estopped from avoiding enforcement of contract holding a city liable for the unconstitutional firing of two clerks by a municipal judge when it was clear the city had delegated to him final administrative authority over employment matters holding that claims against a city police chief in his official capacity were really claims against the city