Brown v. Roach

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the respondent’s offensive and hostile statements, including the statement, “We know what to do with your type[,]” were insufficient to meet the Rangel standard
• concluding that the nonspeech conduct (i.e., running up to the peti- tioner) that was separable from the respondent’s speech did not give rise to objectively reasonable alarm
• concluding that the “nonspeech conduct” that was separable from the respondent’s speech did not give rise to objectively reasonable “alarm”
• observing that we have repeatedly held that “offensive, hostile, and aggressive statements are not enough to satisfy the standard [set out in Rangel]”
• explaining that the “[t]he victim’s situation includes all of the circumstances of the parties’ relationship” and that the respondent’s conduct “did not give rise to an objectively rea- sonable apprehension or fear of physical injury” either at the time or in the future
• requiring proof of an objectively reasonable apprehension or fear of physical injury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).