Central Construction Co. v. City of Lexington

How courts have described this case

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

• finding the 11 plaintiff did not provide evidence of a chilling effect when his mail was delayed on three 12 occasions, but, each time, the mail was ultimately delivered and the delays were not harmful
• “Here, because there is a genuine issue of material fact as to retaliatory motive, 5 defendants cannot rely on the prison’s legitimate penological interest in prison security to succeed 6 on their motion for summary judgment.”
• circumstantial evidence of timing, without more, is insufficient

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).