§Why CasetextPricing

RALPHS GROCERY v. UNITED FOOD & COMMERCIAL WORKERS UNION

Respondent’s Reply Brief on the Merits

74 Cited authorities

  1. Connick v. Myers

    461 U.S. 138 (1983)   Cited 5,861 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer need not "allow events to unfold to the extent that the disruption of the office and the destruction of working relationships is manifest before taking action"

  2. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan

    376 U.S. 254 (1964)   Cited 6,909 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a public official or public figure can recover damages for defamation on a matter of public concern only if he proves that the speaker acted with actual malice

  3. Hill v. Colorado

    530 U.S. 703 (2000)   Cited 1,273 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding content neutral a ban on "picketing," "demonstrating," "protest, education, or counseling" even though it may require the government "to review the content of the statements made"

  4. R.A.V. v. St. Paul

    505 U.S. 377 (1992)   Cited 1,613 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding the government may not "license one side of a debate to fight freestyle, while requiring the other to follow Marquis of Queensberry rules"

  5. Snyder v. Phelps

    562 U.S. 443 (2011)   Cited 812 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Westboro Baptist Church's protest of military funerals with signs that display "Thank God for IEDs" and "Thank God for Dead Soldiers" is protected speech

  6. Broadrick v. Oklahoma

    413 U.S. 601 (1973)   Cited 3,440 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Oklahoma may regulate the political activities of its state employees

  7. Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic

    547 U.S. 47 (2006)   Cited 811 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that nothing about having military recruiters on campus "suggests that law schools agree with any speech by recruiters"

  8. Lakewood v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co.

    486 U.S. 750 (1988)   Cited 1,028 times
    Holding that a statute "placing unbridled discretion in the hands of a government official or agency" is unconstitutional

  9. Hustler Magazine v. Falwell

    485 U.S. 46 (1988)   Cited 793 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “public figures and public officials” must prove “actual malice” in addition to falsity before recovering for intentional infliction of emotional distress on the basis of speech directed at them

  10. Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley

    408 U.S. 92 (1972)   Cited 1,333 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding a law was content-based where it prohibited nonlabor-related picketing at a place of employment

  11. Section 1997e - Suits by prisoners

    42 U.S.C. § 1997e   Cited 53,712 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that prisoners must exhaust "available" administrative remedies before filing suit in federal court

  12. Section 1997 - Definitions

    42 U.S.C. § 1997   Cited 2,446 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Requiring exhaustion of "such administrative remedies as are available"

  13. Section 2

    Cal. Const. art. I § 2   Cited 476 times
    Restricting prohibition to state-licensed “mental health providers”

  14. Section 107 - Issuance of injunctions in labor disputes; hearing; findings of court; notice to affected persons; temporary restraining order; undertakings

    29 U.S.C. § 107   Cited 339 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Requiring hearing prior to issuance of an injunction in labor disputes

  15. Rule 8.29 - Service on nonparty public officer or agency

    Cal. R. 8.29   Cited 6 times

    (a)Proof of service When a statute or this rule requires a party to serve any document on a nonparty public officer or agency, the party must file proof of such service with the document unless a statute permits service after the document is filed, in which case the proof of service must be filed immediately after the document is served on the public officer or agency. (Subd (a) relettered effective January 1, 2007; adopted as subd (b).) (b)Identification on cover When a statute or this rule requires