Pennsylvania Game Commission v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that school officials were entitled to qualified immunity and finding no due process violation where ban prohibited parent’s presence on school property and attendance at any school-sponsored activities
• holding that a school board policy that limited the content of public matters related to the public schools and “prohibits all personal attacks, regardless of viewpoint” is reasonable in light of the purpose served by the forum because the policy is viewpoint-neutral
• citing. Constantine v. Rectors & Visitors of George Mason Univ., 411 F.3d 474, 499 (4th Cir. 2005)
• relying on Wolf v. Fauquier Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 555 F.3d 311 (4th Cir. 2009)
• finding summary judgment appropriate where a plaintiff had not “sufficiently provided evidence to prove that the no-trespass ban was issued because of his protected speech, as opposed to his threats and antagonistic behavior”
• “[D]enying a speaker at the podium in a . . . hearing the right to launch personal attacks does not interfere with what that speaker could say without employing such attacks.” (quoting Steinburg v. Chesterfield Cnty. Plan. Comm’n, 527 F.3d 377, 387 (4th Cir. 2008))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).