Summary
Hornblower, Inc. Suspended its email deletion policy likely due to anticipated legal action or investigation, necessitating a litigation hold to preserve evidence. Prior restraint is heavily disfavored under the First Amendment, explaining the courts decision not to stop a play criticizing the city council. Lionel cannot bring a lawsuit in federal court if it is based solely on Kansas state law, as federal courts require federal law involvement or diversity jurisdiction. Minnie can be excused from jury duty through a for cause challenge if her impartiality is in question.Full Conversation
A school theater group is planning to put on a play that sharply criticizes the city counsel of
Smallville, Kansas. The city sues to prevent the performance, arguing that it is prohibited by a
neutral time, place, and manner restriction.
The court agrees that the TPM restriction is constitutional, and the actors might be fined for
disorderly conduct if they go forward with it. But it refuses to stop the performance. What concept
that we have studied would explain this decision?
The concept that would explain this decision is "prior restraint." Prior restraint refers to government actions that prevent speech or expression before it takes place. Courts generally consider prior restraint to be unconstitutional unless it meets strict scrutiny. The court's refusal to stop the performance, despite acknowledging the constitutionality of the time, place, and manner (TPM) restriction, aligns with the principle that prior restraint is heavily disfavored under the First Amendment.
Do you have any other questions or need more information on this topic?
Lionel lives in Lawrence and loves to litigate. He tells his lawyer that he wants to sue his neighbor.
The lawyer hears Lionel out and explains that there is no federal law that suits his interests here,
but there is a Kansas law that would work. Can he bring that lawsuit in federal court? Why or why
not?
Lionel cannot bring the lawsuit in federal court if it is based solely on Kansas state law. Federal courts have jurisdiction over cases involving federal laws, disputes between states, or cases involving residents of different states with amounts in controversy exceeding $*,* (diversity jurisdiction). Since the issue involves Kansas state law and both parties likely reside in Kansas, the case would need to be brought in a Kansas state court.
Do you need more information on jurisdiction or other related topics?
Minnie is a prospective juror. The case involves a university professor suing a barista. During voir
dire, the lawyer for the plaintiff asks her whether she can be impartial in a case where either
academics or baristas are likely to testify. Minnie says she thinks she can be, but she really has to
think about it and it’s clear that she’s not sure. The lawyer wants to strike her, but he has used all
of his peremptory strikes. Is there any other way she could be excused from the venire? If not, why
not? If so, how?
Minnie can still be excused from the venire through a "for cause" challenge. The lawyer must convince the judge that Minnie's uncertainty about her impartiality could bias her judgment, thereby justifying her removal for cause.
Do you have any other questions or need more information on jury selection?
TRY ME!
Start a new chat