green
Positive treatment
2.8 score
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
State v. Liebenguth
But cf. Sandul v. Larion, 119 F.3d 1250, 1252, 1255 (6th Cir.) (when passenger in vehicle traveling at high rate of speed shouted ‘‘ ‘[fuck] you’ ’’ and extended his middle finger at abortion protesters who were located considerable distance away, there was no face- to-face contact between passenger and protesters, no protester was offended or even acknowledged passen- ger’s behavior, and entire incident was over in matter of seconds, ‘‘it was inconceivable that [the passenger’s] fleeting actions and words would provoke the type of lawless action’’ necessary to satisfy …
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Parnoff
See Sandul v. Larion , 119 F.3d 1250 , 1255-56 (6th Cir.) (holding that "the use of the 'f-word' in and of itself is not criminal conduct," and that, in light of Supreme Court precedent, its use does not amount to fighting words because "the mere words and gesture 'f-k you' are constitutionally protected speech"), cert. dismissed, 522 U.S. 979 , 118 S.Ct. 439 , 139 L.Ed.2d 377 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Junger v. Daley
See, e.g., Sandul v. Larion, 119 F.3d 1250, 1255 (6th Cir.), cert. *717 dismissed, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 439 , 139 L.Ed.2d 377 (1997) (observing that words “which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace” are not protected because they “are no essential part of any exposition of ideas _”) (quoting Chaplinsky, 315 U.S. at 572 , 62 S.Ct. 766 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Edward S. COHEN
v.
Hilda DE LA CRUZ
v.
Hilda DE LA CRUZ
No. 96-1923.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 17, 1997.
Published
Motion of petitioner Edward Cohen to dispense with printing the joint appendix grant-, ed.