Legal Opinion · Dissent

Intel Corp. v. Hamidi

California Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 2003No. S103781Published

1Dissent

BROWN, J., Dissenting.

Candidate A finds the vehicles that candidate B has provided for his campaign workers, and A spray paints the water soluble message, “Fight corruption, vote for A” on the bumpers. The majority’s reasoning would find that notwithstanding the time it takes the workers to remove the paint and the expense they incur in altering the bumpers to prevent further unwanted messages, candidate B does not deserve an injunction unless the paint is so heavy that it reduces the cars’ gas mileage or otherwise depreciates the cars’ market value. Furthermore, candidate B has an obligation…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Schneider v. State (Town of Irvington)Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
  3. Wooley v. MaynardSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. Frisby v. SchultzSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Kovacs v. CooperSupreme Court of the United States · 1949

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API