Legal Opinion
Perkins v. Rich
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided March 15, 1962No. Civ. A. 2235PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RODNEY, Senior District Judge.
The plaintiff here is acting pro se and without counsel and every paper filed is inartistic and almost indecipherable, but under such circumstances it is the duty of the Court to see, in so far as possible, that no indicated rights of such party are overlooked. 1 From matters appearing herein, the following facts are shown.
Since 1955 the following statute of the State of Delaware has appeared as 11 Del C. § 758:
“Whoever makes use of telephone facilities or equipment and therein communicates language, suggestions or proposals which are obscene, profane, vulgar,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Screws v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Bradley v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Tenney v. BrandhoveSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1945
- Watkins v. Oaklawn Jockey ClubCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1950
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- John J. Pitchell v. James F. Callan, Gregory Sargis and City of Hartford, David J. Lesser and Steven Del Sole, Special MastersCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- William J. Bauers, Jr. v. Herbert T. Heisel, JrCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966
- Johnson Ex Rel. Johnson v. HackettDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1968
- Pugliano v. StaziakDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1964
- Gaito v. StraussDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1966
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.