Harcz, Jr. et al v. Boucher et al, No. 1:2017cv00112 - Document 121 (W.D. Mich. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment 94 is DENIED; Defendants' motion for summary judgment 99 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; signed by Judge Gordon J. Quist (jas)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Dockets.Justia.com MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BACKGROUND Harcz, Jr. et al v. Boucher et al Doc. 121 Id. Id. Id. Id. see Bible Believers v. Wayne Cnty. Fairborn Bays v. City of Saieg v. City of Dearborn Parks v. City of Columbus Id. Id. Id. Harcz v. Boucher Id. Id. Id. Id. Saieg, Parks see also Teesdale v. City Parks Gathright v. City of Chicago of Portland See Perry Educ. Ass’n. See Turner Bays v. City of Fairborn Saieg Startzell v. Philadelphia See Id. See al-Kidd Harcz Id. Id. LEGAL STANDARD Minadeo v. ICI Paints Amini v. Oberlin Coll. Id. Daniels v. Woodside Pack v. Damon Corp ANALYSIS I. First Amendment Claims Jones v. Clark Cnty Martin v. City of Broadview Heights Seales v. City of Detroit Silberstein v. City of Dayton Bletz v. Gribble Ciminillo v. Streicher A. Constitutional Violation Parks, Id. Id. Saieg Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Def. and Educ. Fund, Inc. Bays Org. for a Better Austin v. Keefe See Grosjean v. Bommarito Michigan Up & Out of Poverty Now Coal. v. State of Michigan Community for Creative NonViolence v. Kerrigan Bible Believers M.A.L. ex rel. M.L. v. Kinsland 1. Content Neutrality Saieg, Christian Legal Soc’y v. Martinez Ward v. Rock Against Racism See Saieg Hill v. Colorado Startzell v. City of Philadelphia See Parks, see also McGlone v. Metro Gov’t of Nashville Id. Id. See Lowery v. Jefferson Cnty. Bd. of Educ. 2. Narrowly Tailored to Serve a Significant Government Interest Bays United States v. Grace Saieg, Startzell see also Gerber v. Herskovitz Black’s Law Dictionary Id. Saieg Bay Area Peace Navy v. United States yet Harcz 3. Ample Alternative Avenues Saieg Phelps-Roper v. Strickland See id. Contributor v. City of Brentwood B. Clearly Established Reichle v. Howards Anderson v. Creighton White v. Pauly Anderson Ashcroft v. al–Kidd see also Hart v. Hillsdale Cnty See, e.g. Startzell Gathright v. City of Portland See Parks Jones v. City of Elyria Id. Saucier v. Katz Gregory v. City of Louisville Bellamy v. Bradley Peatross v. City of Memphis Hays v. Jefferson Cnty. Hays II. Harcz’s Individual Claims A. False Arrest Harcz Beck v. Ohio Radvansky v. City of Olmsted Falls, Klein v. Long See Weser v. Goodson and Nieves v. Bartlett Id. Id. Nieves Bartlett v. Nieves See Radvansky, Osberry v. Slusher Parsons v. City of Pontiac B. Malicious Prosecution Jackson v. City of Cleveland Sykes v. Anderson, Johnson v. Moseley People v. Moreno Id Sykes Id Newman v. Twp. of Hamburg Matthews v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan Id. Phillips v. City of Cincinnati, Wright v. Holbrook See Taylor v. City of E. Cleveland C. Qualified Immunity to Federal Claims Spurlock v. Satterfield Id. Marco Int’l, LLC v Como-Coffee, LLC See, e.g. Spurlock v. Satterfield Sova v. City of Mt. Pleasant D. Governmental Immunity to State Law Claims Odom v. Wayne Cnty. Ross v. Consumers Power Co. Id. Id. Burnett v. City of Adrian Id CONCLUSION Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED DENIED GRANTED IN PART DENIED IN PART IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
