614 F. App'x 912
9th Cir.2015Background
- Courthouse News Service appeals the district court’s grant of Planet’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint.
- This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and reviews de novo, reversing and remanding.
- On prior appeal, we held the district court lacked discretion to abstain under Pullman because of First Amendment access concerns.
- CNS alleged delays in access to newly filed civil complaints across courthouses, claiming up to 34 days delay.
- On remand, the district court treated same-day access as a pure legal question and dismissed claims without assessing the CNS allegations.
- We remand again to allow proper fact-specific analysis consistent with our prior opinion, and we order reassignment to a different district judge for appearance of justice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether same-day access is required by the First Amendment. | CNS contends delays violate the access right | Planet argues no First Amendment mandate for same-day access | Remanded for proper evaluation of access merits under First Amendment framework |
| Whether the district court properly applied Rule 12(b)(6) after remand. | CNS alleges factual delays and state of pleadings should be deemed true | Planet asserts failure to state a claim as a matter of law | Reversal and remand for proper fact-specific inquiry in light of precedent |
| Whether reassignment is warranted to preserve the appearance of justice. | reassignment needed due to judge’s expressed views | No bias shown; reassignment unnecessary | Reassignment ordered to preserve appearance of justice |
Key Cases Cited
- Courthouse News Serv. v. Planet, 750 F.3d 776 (9th Cir. 2014) (reaffirmed First Amendment access to civil proceedings and remanded for proper analysis)
- ASARCO, LLC v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 765 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. 2014) (addressed abstention and related abstention standards in similar context)
- Railroad Comm’n of Texas v. Pullman Co., 312 U.S. 496 (U.S. 1941) (abstention due to unresolved state-law questions)
- Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781 (U.S. 1989) (time, place, or manner restrictions on speech)
- Leigh v. Salazar, 677 F.3d 892 (9th Cir. 2012) (framework for overriding government interests in access cases)