Tory v. Cochran - 544 U.S. 734, 125 S. Ct. 2108 (2005)

Rule:

Where an injunction continues significantly to restrain a party's speech, it presents an ongoing federal controversy. Consequently, a court need not dismiss such a case as moot. A case not moot where it appears from "terms" of the injunction that it is "still in force" and unless set aside must be complied with.

Facts:

In a state-law defamation action filed by attorney Johnnie L. Cochran, Jr., a California trial court found that petitioner Tory, assisted by petitioner Craft and others, had, inter alia, falsely claimed that Cochran owed him money, picketed Cochran's office with signs containing insults and obscenities, and pursued Cochran while chanting similar threats and insults, in order to coerce Cochran into paying Tory money to desist from such libelous and slanderous activity. Because Tory indicated that he would continue to engage in the activity absent a court order, the court permanently enjoined petitioners and their agents from, among other things, picketing, displaying signs, and making oral statements about Cochran and his firm in any public forum. The California Court of Appeal affirmed, and the Court granted certiorari. After oral argument, Cochran's counsel informed the Court of Cochran's death, moved to substitute Cochran's widow as respondent, and suggested that the case be dismissed as moot. Petitioners agreed to the substitution, but denied that the case was moot.

Issue:

Did Cochran's death render the case moot?

Answer:

No

Conclusion:

The Court found that the injunction remained in effect because, under California law, one could not definitively know an injunction was legally void until a court ruled that it was. Thus, the injunction continued significantly to restrain petitioners' speech, presenting an ongoing federal controversy. However, Cochran's death made it unnecessary to explore petitioners' basic First Amendment claims. The injunction could no longer achieve the trial court's objectives. Thus, the injunction, as written, amounted to an overly broad prior restraint upon speech, lacking plausible justification