Steelcase, Inc. v. Office Interiors of Florida, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that if statute may be applied constitutionally to facts of case, facial vagueness claim fails
• declining to graft requirements of § 53a-8 onto legislation not evident in General Statutes § 53a-217a as written
• “[a]ssuming, without deciding, that [the challenged statute] implicates a fundamental constitutional right, and further assuming that we would be willing to engage in a facial vagueness analysis outside the context of the first amendment, we need not do so in this case”
• declining to graft language onto statutes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).