Bell v. Mazza

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the state legislature explicitly limited the remedy provided by § 111 to situations where the derogation of rights occurs by threats, intimidation, or coercion
• finding that neighbors’ threat — to “do anything at any cost” to prevent homeowners’ construction of tennis court — and accompanying physical prevention of homeowners’ passage constituted “threats, intimidation or coercion”
• noting that the state legislature explicitly limited the remedy provided by § 111 to situations where the derogation of rights occurs by threats, intimidation or coercion
• concerning plaintiffs’ claim of interference with their right to use and improve their property by construction of a tennis court
• finding the right to “use and improve” land sufficient to support MCRA claim, and also finding an interference with this right where neighbors sought to block the construction of a tennis court on the plaintiffs property
• statements that the defendant would “do anything at any cost to prevent the plaintiffs’ construction of the tennis court,” exceeded impoliteness and constituted threat

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).