Dietrich v. John Ascuaga's Nugget

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the issue of probable cause is not dispositive of ordinary retaliation claims, though it still has “high probative force”
• holding that exclusion of a person from a permitted event open to the public because of the asserted right of the permittees to exclude anyone expressing a political message violated the First Amendment
• noting that, if the defendants had restricted speech “to protect safety or the free flow of pedestrian traffic, we would face a different question.”
• noting that private individuals are not 4 liable under Section 1983 unless they meet one of four tests, and reminding that “a bare allegation 5 of such joint action will not overcome [dismissal.”
• noting-that “the government has a strong interest in ensuring the public safety and promoting the free flow of traffic on public streets and sidewalks”
• “[A] bare allegation of such joint action will not overcome a motion to dismiss.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).