Batchelder v. Allied Stores Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that the “Legislature intended to provide a remedy ... co-extensive with 42 U.S.C. § 1983, except that the Federal statute requires State action whereas its State counterpart does not”
• finding that order by uniformed security officer to stop soliciting signatures, an order which carried with it an implicit threat of ejection from the premises, constituted sufficient intimidation or coercion to satisfy MCRA
• finding “sufficient intimidation or coercion” where private security guard ordered plaintiff to stop exercising his right to ballot access
• commenting, in case where sole issue concerned correctness of denial of attorney’s fees under § 1988 and G. L. c. 12, § 111, that “[w]e look primarily to Federal law in determining whether to award attorney’s fees”
• “The Legislature passed this statute to respond to a need for civil rights protection under State law”
• “we have rejected the assertion that art. 16 can ‘extend no further than the comparable provisions of the First Amendment’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).