Legal Opinion
Robbinsdale Clinic, P.A. v. Pro-Life Action Ministries
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided April 19, 1994No. C1-93-1951PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SCHUMACHER, Judge.
Following a hearing before the district court, appellant Lori Driver was found in contempt for communicating with a patient of respondent Robbinsdale Clinic, P.A. (Clinic) and for attempting to communicate with the patient’s parents. We reverse.
FACTS
In response to a request by Clinic, the district court permanently enjoined a number *90of parties, including Driver, from harassing people within “Zone A,” an area of several square blocks surrounding Clinic. Driver was also enjoined from acting in concert with other people if doing so would result in prohibited activity.
On…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- R. A. v. v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Frisby v. SchultzSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Kovacs v. CooperSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Kleindienst v. MandelSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. Christopher W. YakichWisconsin Supreme Court · 2022
- C.L.D. v. Wall-Mart Stores, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1999
- Lake v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- Robbinsdale Clinic, P.A. v. Pro-Life Action MinistriesCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994