Connection lost
Server error
Tompkins v. Cyr Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Anti-abortion protestors were held liable for torts after a targeted harassment campaign against a doctor. The court found their “focused picketing” at his home was unprotected conduct, not protected speech, and thus could be the basis for a damages award without violating the First Amendment.
Legal Significance: This case establishes that imposing tort liability for “focused picketing” at a private residence is a constitutionally permissible, content-neutral regulation of conduct that is not protected by the First Amendment, distinguishing it from protected public-issue speech.
Tompkins v. Cyr Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Dr. Norman Tompkins, a physician who performed abortions as part of his practice, and his wife were targeted by anti-abortion activists and organizations, including Dallas PLAN and Operation Rescue. After Dr. Tompkins refused to sign a pledge to stop performing abortions, the defendants launched a sustained campaign against him. This campaign involved daily protests directly in front of and in the driveway of the Tompkins’ home, a practice the court identified as “focused picketing.” The defendants also published the Tompkins’ home address and phone number, leading to a deluge of harassing calls and mail, including threats. Several defendants engaged in constant surveillance of the home, followed the plaintiffs in their cars (resulting in one high-speed chase), trespassed on their property, and directly confronted them in a threatening manner. As a result of this ten-month campaign, the plaintiffs became fearful for their lives, hired bodyguards, and suffered severe emotional distress. Dr. Tompkins’ medical practice collapsed, forcing him to close it and relocate. A jury found for the plaintiffs on claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and civil conspiracy, awarding significant damages.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the First Amendment shield protestors from tort liability for a campaign of harassment that includes focused picketing directed at a private residence?
No. The First Amendment does not shield protestors from tort liability for Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the First Amendment shield protestors from tort liability for a campaign of harassment that includes focused picketing directed at a private residence?
Conclusion
The case provides a key framework for analyzing the intersection of First Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco lab
Legal Rule
While the First Amendment protects peaceful protest on matters of public concern, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolo
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis centered on the distinction between protected speech and unprotected Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugia
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Tort liability for IIED and invasion of privacy does not violate