Earle v. Washington D.C. Police Department

How courts have described this case

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

• “The illegality of the enjoined conduct does not protect plaintiffs as local police are unable to prevent blockades.”
• “[T]he permanent injunction in this case is narrowly tailored to enjoin only unlawful blockades.”
• “The Virginia court’s findings also establish that defendants have engaged in conduct in this district that violates the District of Columbia law against trespass and the common law prohibition of public nuisance.”
• where “the Virginia court’s alternative determinations are adopted in their entirety as alternative holdings in this judgment,” all three alternative holdings of the Virginia court “are entitled to preclusive effect in this litigation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).