We therefore reverse the judgment insofar as it denied Bad Frog's federal claims for injunctive relief with respect to the disapproval of its labels. We conclude that the State's prohibition of the labels from use in all circumstances does not materially advance its asserted interests in insulating children from vulgarity or promoting temperance, and is not narrowly tailored to the interest concerning children. Scullin, Jr., Judge) granting summary judgment in favor of NYSLA and its three Commissioners and rejecting Bad Frog's commercial free speech challenge to NYSLA's decision. The New York State Liquor Authority (“NYSLA” or “the Authority”) denied Bad Frog's application.īad Frog appeals from the July 29, 1997, judgment of the District Court for the Northern District of New York (Frederic J. (“Bad Frog”) sought permission to use on bottles of its beer products. The frog appears on labels that Bad Frog Brewery, Inc. Marjorie Heins, Beth Haroules, New York City, submitted a brief for amici curiae the American Civil Liberties Union and the New York Civil Liberties Union.Ī picture of a frog with the second of its four unwebbed “fingers” extended in a manner evocative of a well known human gesture of insult has presented this Court with significant issues concerning First Amendment protections for commercial speech. Gen., Albany, NY, on the brief), for defendants-appellees. Shelly, Barrett & Gravante, Albany, NY, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellant. Decided: January 15, 1998īefore: NEWMAN, ALTIMARI, and CALABRESI, Circuit Judges. Kelly, individually and as members of the New York State Liquor Authority, Defendants-Appellees. NEW YORK STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY, Anthony J. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit.īAD FROG BREWERY, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |