Macao Commercial and Industrial Spring Mattress Mfr. v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that plaintiff did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in areas of his home to which he invited the public for commercial purposes and in which an office sign had been posted
• finding no privacy invasion where video was filmed from a publicly open place and involved no subterfuge
• relying on Section 211 for an individual’s privilege to enter land to perform a duty created by legislative enactment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).