It's not slang! Nev. court permits 'HOE' license
Legal News Center
A Las Vegas man won a courtroom battle Wednesday with the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles over his "HOE" license plate, which the agency tried to cancel on grounds that he was using a slang reference to prostitutes.
The high court said the DMV based its opposition to William Junge's plate on definitions found in the Web-based Urban Dictionary, which includes user contributions. Justices ruled that the contributed definitions "do not always reflect generally accepted definitions for words."
Junge, whose case was pursued by the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, said he got the "HOE" plate in 1999 for his Chevy Tahoe, after being told "TAHOE" wasn't available.
"It's nonsense," Junge said of the state agency's efforts to pull his plates. The 62-year-old said he was referring to his vehicle's model and not to prostitutes with his plates, adding: "That was their interpretation. Shame on them."
The high court said Urban Dictionary "allows, if not encourages, users to invent new words or attribute new, not generally accepted meanings to existing words."
But "a reasonable mind would not accept the Urban Dictionary entries alone as adequate to support a conclusion that the word 'HOE' is offensive or inappropriate," the justices wrote.
Rebecca Gasca of the ACLU of Nevada said the attempt by a DMV supervisor to cancel Junge's license plate violated constitutional First Amendment protections. Junge dropped out of the litigation after the DMV appealed to the Supreme Court, but the ACLU continued the fight.
"While the Urban Dictionary might be an entertaining Web site about the English language, the court acknowledged it's not a reliable source for DMV decision-making about whether a license plate is vulgar," Gasca said.
In written briefs submitted to the state Supreme Court, an attorney for the DMV argued there was no First Amendment violation and the state has a reasonable basis for regulating vanity plates on vehicles. It also said the term "hoe" was derogatory toward women.
Related listings
-
Supreme court allows NY state's bank lending probe
Legal News Center 06/29/2009The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the New York attorney general's office can investigate whether national banks discriminated against minorities seeking mortgages. The justices overturned part of a ruling by a U.S. appeals court that entire...
-
Court says strip search of Ariz. teenager illegal
Legal News Center 06/26/2009The Supreme Court ruled Thursday school officials violated an Arizona teenage girl rights by strip-searching her for prescription-strength ibuprofen, saying U.S. educators should not force children to remove their clothing unless student safety is at...
-
Court says public must pay for private special ed
Legal News Center 06/22/2009The Supreme Court has made it easier for parents of special education students to be reimbursed for the cost of private schooling for their children. The court ruled 6-3 Monday in favor of a teenage boy from Oregon whose parents sought to force their...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.