Stocker v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there was no retaliatory act where government official filed an attorney disciplinary complaint against the plaintiff and publicly accused him of litigiousness
• holding that federal jurisdiction exists over plaintiff’s § 1983 First Amendment retaliation claim against the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County in her individual capacity
• reiterating that “Retaliatory speech” may be “actionable.. .in situations of ‘threat, coercion, or intimidation that punishment, sanction, or adverse regulatory action w[ill] immediately follow”’
• noting that “a Monell defense is a ‘mere defense to liability,’ not immunity from suit”
• noting that a public official’s statements about a plaintiff, even if false or defamatory, did not violate the plaintiff’s First Amendment rights unless accompanied by threats, coercion, or intimidation
• noting an attorney who advocates on a client's behalf is not exercising personal First Amendment rights

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).