In re the Marriage of Suggs
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFairhurst, J.
The trial court issued an order for protection from unlawful civil harassment restraining petitioner from “knowingly and willfully making invalid and unsubstantiated allegations or complaints to third parties which are designed for the purpose of annoying, harassing, *77vexing, or otherwise harming Andrew O. Hamilton and for no lawful purpose.” Clerk’s Papers (CP) at 415 (capitalization omitted). The Court of Appeals affirmed. We reverse on the ground that this antiharassment order is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech.
I. FACTS
Five years after their acrimonious dissolution, respondent…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Chaplinsky v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Gonzaga University v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Shelton v. TuckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Near v. Minnesota Ex Rel. OlsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. ConradSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Vincent L. Fields v. Doug WaddingtonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Perricone v. PerriconeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- Vec v. State Public Disclosure Com'nWashington Supreme Court · 2007
- Trummel v. MitchellWashington Supreme Court · 2006
- Trummel v. MitchellWashington Supreme Court · 2006
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.