Mary Pieczynski v. Katherine Duffy and Roberto Maldonado

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that nontrivial threats and harassment are actionable
• holding that nontrivial threats and harassment are actionable
• noting that harassment based on political beliefs could violate the First Amendment “unless the harassment is so trivial that a person of ordinary firmness would not be deterred from holding or expressing those beliefs”
• noting harassment does not violate the First Amendment if it is \so trivial that person of ordinary firmness would not be deterred from holding or expressing those beliefs\
• noting harassment does not violate the First Amendment if it is “so trivial that person of ordinary firmness would not be deterred from holding or expressing those beliefs”
• “Harassment of a public employee ... violates the First Amendment unless the harassment is so trivial that a person of ordinary firmness would not be deterred from ... expressing those beliefs.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).