Goodrum v. Flowers

How courts have described this case

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

• noting self-motivated communications to avoid legal liability were \inconsistent with any claimed intent to engage in public debate\
• finding communications were not in furtherance of free speech rights because they were made to avoid legal liability and concerned a private matter
• no private right of action in statute regulating pharmacists where statute was intended to benefit general public and contained broad regulatory scheme

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).