Wandering Dago, Inc. v. Destito

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a program permitting vendors to sell food on a state-owned plaza did not qualify as government speech because there was no basis to find that the vendors and the vendors’ names “are closely identified with the government ‘in the public mind.’”
• considering factors in determining that names of food vendors at state- organized lunch program were not government speech
• raising “the question of the sincerity of Plaintiff’s legal research” and Plaintiff’s “professional fairness” based on the existence of Plaintiff’s submission opposing Defendants’ reply 56.1 statement
• finding, as part of the government speech analysis, that a private party’s participation in a government program would likely not “be viewed by the public” as the government adopting the private party’s speech as its own
• “When I stand next to her, I looked at the mat and nothing wrong with it.”
• government entity “may place content- neutral restrictions on the time, place, and manner of” protected speech

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Wandering Dago, Inc. v. Destito

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Wandering Dago, Inc. v. Destito
  Second Circuit· 2018-01-03