Dorman v. Satti

678 F. Supp. 375 (1988)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Dorman v. Satti

United States District Court for the District of Connecticut
678 F. Supp. 375 (1988)

  • Written by Haley Gintis, JD

Facts

In 1985 the state of Connecticut passed the Hunter Harassment Act (the act) to criminalize interfering with or harassing an individual engaged in the lawful taking of wildlife or acting in preparation for the lawful taking of wildlife. In 1986 Francelle Dorman (plaintiff) filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim in federal district court against State Attorney Robert Satti (defendant). Dorman had been arrested under the act for trying to dissuade hunters from hunting geese. However, the state dismissed the charges because the arrest was premature. Dorman claimed that the act violated her rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution by being overly broad and unconstitutionally vague. Satti argued that the act regulated conduct rather than speech; was content-neutral and imposed reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions; and was reasonably necessary to further the state’s interest in regulating lawful hunting.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Nevas, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 816,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership