Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Laronga

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that in a vagueness challenge “a federal court must, of course, consider any limiting construction that a state court or enforcement agency has proffered”
• recognizing that businesses seek to clarify the meaning of a regulation by inquiring of an administrative agency, or by resort to an administrative process
• holding that \administrative regulation will often suffice to clarify a standard with an otherwise uncertain scope\
• holding that “as applied” analysis was proper standard when due process challenge was made to statute
• recognizing that general rule applies only to stat- utes that \implicate[ ] no constitutionally protected conduct\ (empha- sis added)
• holding that the possible inhibition of a constitutional right is “perhaps the most important factor”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).