Courthouse News Service v. Michael Planet

Filing 26

Filed (ECF) Appellant Courthouse News Service Motion to take judicial notice of. Date of service: 09/12/2012. [8320964] (REM)

U.S. Court of Appeals Docket No. 11-57187
___________________________________________________________
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
___________________________________________________________
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE,
Plaintiff/Appellant,
vs.
MICHAEL PLANET, in his official capacity as Court Executive Officer/ Clerk of
the Ventura County Superior Court,
Defendant/Appellee.
___________________________________________________________
On Appeal from a Decision of the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Case No. CV11-08083 R
The Honorable Manuel Real
___________________________________________________________
APPELLANT COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE’S
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
___________________________________________________________
Roger Myers, Esq.
Rachel Matteo-Boehm, Esq.
David Greene, Esq.
Leila Knox, Esq.
BRYAN CAVE LLP
560 Mission Street, 25th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2994
Tel: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellant
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE

Plaintiff-Appellant Courthouse News Service (“Courthouse News”),
in support of its concurrently filed Reply Brief, hereby requests that the
Court take judicial notice of the following facts and documents in
accordance with Federal Rule of Evidence 201:
1.

The Bill History of California Senate Bill 326, from the 2011-

2012 Regular Session, accessed from http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/
faces/billNavClient.xhtml on September 5, 2012. A true and correct copy is
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2.

That no action has been taken on California Senate Bill 326

since September 1, 2011.
3.

That California Senate Bill 326 cannot be passed by the

California Legislature because the deadline for the Legislature to do so has
passed.
Each fact for which judicial notice is sought is not subject to
reasonable dispute and is capable of accurate and ready determination by
resort to sources whose accuracy cannot be reasonable questioned, as
explained below.
The Bill History of California Senate Bill 326 can be accessed from
the California Legislature’s official website, http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/
faces/billNavClient.xhtml on September 5, 2012. It is settled that this Court

1

“may take judicial notice of . . . matters of public record,” Reyn’s Pasta
Bella, LLC v. Visa USA, Inc., 442 F.3d 741, 746 n.6 (9th Cir. 2006), and that
“[l]egislative history is properly a subject of judicial notice.” Anderson v.
Holder, 673 F.3d 1089, 1094 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012). Defendant-Appellee
Michael Planet surely will not contest the appropriateness of this Court
taking judicial notice of this document because he sought judicial notice of
an earlier version of this same document in the district court. Appellee’s
Supplemental Excerpts of Record (“SER”) 24.
The fact that no action has been taken on California Senate Bill 326
since September 1, 2011 is not subject to reasonable dispute and is capable
of accurate and ready determination. The Bill History provided by the
California Legislature indicates that the last taken on Senate Bill 326 was on
September 1, 2011, when the bill was “re-referred to Com. on APPR.” See
Exhibit A.
The fact that California Senate Bill 326 cannot be passed by the
California Legislature because the deadline for the Legislature to do so has
passed is also not subject to reasonable dispute and is capable of accurate
and ready determination. The California Constitution, art. 4, §10(c),
provides, as follows:
Any bill introduced during the first year of the biennium of the

2

legislative session that has not been passed by the house of
origin by January 31 of the second calendar year of the
biennium may no longer be acted on by the house. No bill may
be passed by either house on or after September 1 of an evennumbered year except statutes calling elections, statutes
providing for tax levies or appropriations for the usual current
expenses of the State, and urgency statutes, and bills passed
after being vetoed by the Governor.
Consistent with this constitutional limitation, the Joint Rules of the Senate
and Assembly provides that August 31 of each even-numbered year is the
“Last day for each house to pass bills.” Joint Rules of the Senate and
Assembly, 2009-10 regular Session (Temporary Joint Rules of the Senate
and Assembly, as usage and custom, for the 2011-12 regular Session), Rule
61(b)(17) (available at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/rules/joint_rules.pdf).
Copies of these authorities are included in the Appendix to this Request for
Judicial Notice.
None of the exceptions to the constitutional September 1 deadline
apply to Senate Bill 326. The previous version of the Bill History already in
the record, which was generated using the Legislature’s since-revised
Internet interface, indicates that the bill is “non-urgency,” “nonappropriations,” and “non-tax levy.” SER 24. Nor is it subject to reasonable
dispute that Senate Bill 326 is not a statute calling an election, nor a bill that
was passed after being vetoed by the Governor.

3

Thus, the last day for either the Senate or Assembly to pass Senate
Bill 326 was August 31, 2012. As evidenced by Exhibit A, this deadline
passed without Senate Bill 326 advancing out of the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
For the foregoing reasons, Courthouse News requests that the Court,
in considering and ruling upon the Appeal, take judicial notice of Items 1, 2,
and 3 above, including Exhibit A.
DATED: September 12, 2012

BRYAN CAVE LLP
ROGER MYERS
RACHEL MATTEO-BOEHM
DAVID GREENE
LEILA KNOX
By: /s/ Rachel Matteo-Boehm
Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellant
Courthouse News Service

4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on September 12, 2012, I electronically filed the
foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system.
I certify that all participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and
that service will be accomplished by the appellate CM/ECF system.

/s/ Rachel Matteo-Boehm