Smithkline Beecham Corp. v. Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty USA

How courts have described this case

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

• upholding facially content-neutral injunction banning “picketing, demonstrating, leafleting, protesting or congregating at the homes of the Individual Plaintiffs”
• injunction prohibiting all protesting at pharmaceutical corporation’s facilities impermissibly burdened animal rights protesters’ free speech rights since “an outright ban is overbroad.”
• “Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 440(a)(2)(i) states that, where an individual is not represented by an attorney [. . .] ‘service shall be made by ... leaving a copy for the party at ... the residence or place of business of the party.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).