Protests 72404-K of Littlejohn & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “it is often necessary to view contacts in context in order to determine whether they give rise to objectively reasonable alarm,” and concluding that the trial court did not err in considering neighbors’ rela- tionship
• reversing the trial court’s denial of an SPO because “there were at least two 5 We note that, although we have consistently applied Rangel in the civil stalking context, see, e.g., S. L. L. v. MacDonald, 267 Or App 628, 630, 340 P3d 773 (2014
• statement, “Come down here, motherfucker, and I’ll show you,” was not a threat under Rangel, as it was only “a vague invitation to fight”
• noncommunicative portion of the respondent’s conduct during a particular incident— shaking his clenched fists at the petitioner—did not give rise to objectively reasonable alarm
• “[I]t is often necessary to view contacts in context in order to determine whether they give rise to objectively reasonable alarm.”
• explain- ing that, in the context of a stalking protective order, “it is often necessary to view contacts in context in order to determine whether they give rise to objectively reason- able alarm”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).