City of Bellevue v. Lorang
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
The question presented is whether the City of Bellevue’s telephone harassment ordinance (Ordinance) is unconstitutional insofar as it forbids speech that is “profane” or “[wjithout purpose of legitimate communication.” Bellevue City Code (BCC) 10A.84.090(A)(1), (4). The Court of Appeals held the Ordinance was constitutional and affirmed Lorang’s conviction. We reverse.
FACTS1
In 1994, City of Bellevue resident Jon Lorang was living *22in an apartment complex managed by the King County Housing Authority (Housing Authority). He was somehow assigned two apartments and was instructed to vacate one of…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- R. A. v. v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Shelton v. TuckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- City of Houston v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Amalgamated Transit Union Local 587 v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. EvansWashington Supreme Court · 2013
- State v. WilliamsWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. WilliamsWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- American Continental Insurance v. SteenWashington Supreme Court · 2004
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.