URI Student Senate v. Town of Narragansett

How courts have described this case

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

• finding a 100% violation rate reasonable where plaintiff alleged class 9 members “consistently” worked without meal breaks
• overbreadth claim failed when plaintiffs’ facial challenge to town ordi- nance did not implicate protections of first amend- ment
• an offense must be defined with “[1] with sufficient definiteness that ordinary people can understand what conduct is prohibited and [2] in a manner that does not encourage arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.”
• “The IDEA accords educators 9 discretion to select from various methods for meeting the 10 individualized needs of a student, provided those practices are 11 reasonably calculated to provide him with educational benefit.”
• “Where the stigma and the incremental harm— the ‘plus’ factor—derive from distinct sources, a party cannot make out a viable procedural due process claim. That is true even if both sources are government entities.”
• “Article III . . . requires a sufficient showing 6 of likely injury in the future related to the plaintiff’s disability to ensure that injunctive relief will 7 vindicate the rights of the particular plaintiff rather than the rights of third parties.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).