With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (5th Cir.1989). 112 . Dodds v. Childers, 933 F.2d 271, 273 (5th Cir.1991). See also Connick, 461 U.S. at 146, 103 S.Ct. 1684 (noting that if the speech at issue “cannot be fairly characterized as a matter of public concern, it is unnecessary for [courts] to scrutinize the reasons for [a public employee's] discharge.”); Davis v. Ector County, 40 F.3d 777, 782 (5th Cir.1994) (Wisdom, J.) ("We note that, were we to find that the subject matter of Davis' letter is not a matter of public concern, our inquiry would end.”). 113 . See Thompson, 901 F.2d at 461. 114 . Dodds, 933 F.2d at 273 (citations omitted). See also Connick, 461 U.S. at 149-50, 103 S.Ct. 1684. 115 . See Thompson, 901 F.2d at 461 (citing Kirkland v. Northside Indep. School Dist., 890 F.2d 794, 798 ( 59 n. 13 (5th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); and Burns v. City of Galveston, 905 F.2d 100,

A: holding that city may properly be held liable where policy is moving force behind constitutional violation
B: 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
C: holding that a city may be held liable on account of the unconstitutional conduct of city officials only if the citys policy or custom played a part in the violation
D: holding that a city may not be held liable under  1983 where there was no underlying constitutional violation by any of its officers
C.