# Bering v. Share

> Washington Supreme Court · June 19, 1986 · 106 Wash. 2d 212

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9548449

## Case

- **Full name:** Stacie C. Bering, Et Al., Respondents, v. Share, Et Al., Appellants
- **Court:** Washington Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 19, 1986
- **Citations:** 106 Wash. 2d 212; 721 P.2d 918
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Goodloe
- **Judges:** Pearson, Dolliver, Dore, Andersen, Goodloe
- **Cited by:** 226 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9548449

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that the state 10 “has a compelling interest in avoiding subjection of children to the physical and 11 psychological abuse inflicted by the picketers’” offensive speech
- finding that the State had a compelling interest in protecting children from the psychological abuse inflicted by picketers' speech

## Opinion text

Goodloe, J.
(dissenting) — I am in complete agreement with Justice Andersen's dissent. I write separately only to note that if, on remand, a narrower place restriction is imposed that such restriction should state specifically where the picketers may not be. Any injunction which states only where the picketers shall be is necessarily too broad and logically precludes them from being anyplace else.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9548449. Public record. Not legal advice.