Courthouse News Service v. Michael Planet

Filing 34

Submitted (ECF) excerpts of record. Submitted by Appellant Courthouse News Service. Date of service: 05/29/2012. [8511359] (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

EXCERPTS OF RECORD
VOLUME II
Roger Myers, Esq.
Rachel Matteo-Boehm, Esq.
David Greene, Esq.
Leila Knox, Esq.
BRYANCAVELLP
560 Mission Street, 25th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2994
Tel: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellant
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE

#79646 vI saf

VOLUMEl
Description

C.D. Cal.
Docket #

Page #

Order Granting Defendant's Motion To Dismiss
And Abstain

38

1

Reporter's Transcript Of Proceedings

44

3

C.D. Cal.
Docket #

Page #

Plaintiffs Notice Of Appeal To The United States
Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit

40

13

Excerpts Of Declaration Of Cheryl Kanatzar In
Support Of Defendant's Opposition To Plaintiff s
Motion For Preliminary Injunction

25-2

15

Excerpts Of Plaintiff Courthouse News Service's
Opposition To the Motion To Dismiss And Abstain
Of Defendant Michael Planet

24

19

Excerpts Of Memorandum Of Points And
Authorities In Support Of Defendant's Motion To
Dismiss And Abstain

21

21

21-1

27

22

30

22-1

34

VOLUME 2
Description

Defendant's Notice Of Motion And Motion To
Dismiss And Abstain
Defendant's Request For Judicial Notice In Support
Of Motion To Dismiss And Abstain
Exhibits To Defendant's Request For Judicial
Notice ill Support Of Motion To Dismiss And
Abstain

2
#79646 vi saf

Description

C.D. Cal.
Docket #

Page #

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Preliminary
Injunction

3

58

Complaint For Injunctive And Declaratory Relief

1

60

District Court Civil Docket Sheet For Case No.
2:11-cv-08083-R MAN

--

122

3
#796% vI saf

ase 2: 11-cv-08083-R -MAN Document 40

Filed 12/15/11

Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:932

13

1
2
3

4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Rachel Matteo-Boehm (SBN 195492)
[e-mail]
David Greene (SBN 160107)
[e-mail]
Leila C. Knox (SBN 245999)
[e-mail]
HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP
560 Mission Street, Suite 250
San Francisco, CA 94105-2994
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Attorneys for Plaintiff
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE

11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
WESTERN DIVISION

12
13
14

Courthouse News Service,

CASE NO. CVII-08083

R (MANx)

15

Plaintiff,

16
v.

17

18
19

Michael Planet, in his official capacity as
Court Executive Officer/Clerk of the
Ventura County Superior Court.

PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF APPEAL
TO THE UNITED STATES COURT
OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH

CIRCUIT

20
Defendant.

21
22
23
24
25

26
27

28

PLAlNTIFF'S
1176440 vl ssf

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Case No. CVl j Og083R (MANx)
M

ER 13

ase 2:11-cv-08083-R -MAN Document 40

Filed 12/15/11

Page 2 of 2 Page 10 #:933

14
1

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Courthouse News Service, the plaintiff in

2

the above-captioned matter, hereby appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for

3

the Ninth Circuit from the Order Granting Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and

4

Abstain ("Order") entered in this action on November 30,2011.

5

is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

6
7

A copy of the Order

Plaintiff's Representation Statement is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 (Fed. R.
App. Proc. 12(b); Circuit Rule 3-2(b».

8

II

HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP
RACHEL MA TIED-BOEHM
DA VID GREENE
LEILA KNOX

12

By:

9

Dated: December 15,2011

10

13

151 Rachel Matteo-Boehm
RACHEL MATTEO-BOEHM
Attorneys for Plaintiff Courthouse News
Service

14

is
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25

26
27
28
1
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF APPEAL
#16440 vI saf

Case No. CVII-08083R (MANx)

ER 14

~s

2:11-cv-08083-R -MAN Document25-2

Filed 10/31/11

Page 1 of43

Page 10

#:548
I
2

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Robert A. Naeve (State Bar No. 106095)
[e-mail]
Erica L. Reilley (State Bar No. 211615)
[e-mail]
JONES DAY
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
MICHAEL PLANET, IN HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS COURT EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/CLERK OF THE VENTURA
COUNTYSUPEIDORCOURT

10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12

13
14

COURTHOUSE

15
16

NEWS SERVICE,

Case No. CVII-08083

Plaintiff,

Assigned for all purposes to
Hon. Manuel L. Real

v.

17
18

DECLARATION OF CHERYL
KANATZAR IN SUPPORT OF
DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION
TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

MICHAEL PLANET, IN HIS

OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COURT

19

EXECUTIVE

OFFICER/CLERK

OF

THE VENTURA COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT,

20
21

R (MANx)

Date:
Time:
Courtroom:

Defendant.

November 21,2011
10:00 a.m,

8

22

23
24
25
26

27

28
- 1-

Declaration of Cheryl Kanatzar ISO
Deft's Opp. to Plfs Mot. for Prelim. Inj.
Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER15

9~

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 25-2

Filed 10/31/11

Page 11 of 43 Page ID

#:558

1
2

~c,

titay].IUnaUlit

3

Depul}' F.:x~ve

Officer

S~PCtiorCoIilt ofCiIlifornia
CD\lI1ty orVClllIlto

4

HallofJUSlitlo
800 South Victoria Avt:nu~
Ventnc8, CA 93009

5

Re: Media Accc.!!S III New Civil FilingS

6

))earMs.~:

7

On bdtalfof Julianna Krolak and ail ofu~ at Courlboose NICWS SerYice, r would like 10
thank )'OIl and your professionallllld helpful=« fQc~ lI,19i!l1Wg. us inemuriDg new cilil
lIIlIimill:d Jilings mala: it to !he;. mQllia biD fur media teYiew before being placed on the
shelf

8
9

Youract,i\lll$lI4ve greatly ialproved pRSS aeeess to an important
of California, and ror !b:tt we me deeply (Ijlprcciative.

10

Cow1liOU9C

in theaatl:

If you ever have BIIy questions for me, 1 am IIlwayuVlIIlable and WI! will nothesi.inb: ttl
w*t you in the futlI!:e if we tur.oreqaestiaD$. On¢Caaam. !IIiIIIk yQu for your assislaoo:.

11

12
13

14
15
16
17
18
19

20
21

22
23
24

25
26
27

28

A complete copy of this letter is attached to this Declaration as Exhibit "E."
21.

It is my understanding that CNS alleges in its complaint that the

Superior Court somehow agreed to an "arrangement" by which "newly filed
complaints were to be made available to Courthouse News' reporter after some
processing but before the complaints had been fully processed, the result of which
was that access became much more timely." This allegation is not correct. As
noted above, Ventura Superior Court took steps to ensure that fully processed
complaints were timely deposited in the Records Department Media Bin. For
reasons that will be detailed below, it has never been our practice to grant access to
"partially processed" complaints.
22.

I received another letter from Mr. Marshall more than a year later on

February 7,2011. Mr. Marshall notified me for the first time in this letter that Ms.
Krolak had been visiting the Superior Court's Records Department on a daily basis

- 11 .

Declaration of Cheryl Kanatzar ISO
Deft's Opp, to Plf's Mot. for Prelim. Inj.
Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER16

<if
1
2
3

4
5
6
7

8
9

10
11
12
13

14
15
16
17
18
19

20
21
22

23
24

25

26
27

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 25-2
#:564

Filed 10/31111

Page 17 of 43 Page 10

applications for temporary restraining orders; complaints for which plaintiffs seek
fee waivers which must be approved by a judicial officer before the complaint can
be accepted for processing; and complaints filed on behalf of minors by guardians
ad litem, who must be appointed as guardians by a judicial officer before the
complaint can be accepted for processing. Newly filed civil unlimited complaints
that are immediately assigned to judicial officers may remain in chambers for
anywhere from one to several days or longer depending on whether the assigned
judicial officer needs to retain the file for further action. The Superior Court is not
in a position to guarantee same-day access to these files for this reason.
34.

Third, it is not possibJe to guarantee "same-day access" to newly filed

civil unlimited complaints that are processed by newly appointed CPAs. One of the
Superior Court's highest responsibilities

is to ensure and promote public trust and

confidence in the Court and its filings. The Superior Court cannot satisfy this
responsibility unless it ensures that its files are in good order, and are complete and
accurate. Hence, complaints that are processed by newly appointed CP As are
subject to a quality control review in which new files are routed to Ms. Martha
Mcl.aughlin, Court Program Supervisor II in charge ofthe Civil Department, who
is responsible for supervising Civil CPAs. It is not uncommon for new CPAs
improperly to process incomplete complaints that should be rejected; to improperly
enter crucial case data that would impair CCMS from properly tracking and
assigning the case; and to improperly enter contact information for attorneys.
These complaints are not ready for review, by the press or other members of the
general public. Instead, Ms. McLaughlin refers the complaint and its file back to
the newly hired CPA who must correct and resubmit the file for final review and
approval. Newly filed civil unlimited complaints are placed in the Media Bin in the
Records Department by Ms. McLaughlin only after they have been corrected and
approved. Once the file is approved, Ms. McLaughlin walks it to the Media Bin;

28
. 17 -

Declaration of Cheryl Kanatzar ISO
Deft's Opp. to Plf's Mot. for Prelim. Inj.
Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER17

c~

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 25-2

1
2

3
4

Filed 10/31/11

Page 18 of 43

Page 10

#:565

1ti

the new filings CPA then deals with conformed copies. This quality control
process could take from one to several days. The Superior Court is not in a position
to guarantee same-day access to complaints processed by newly appointed CP As
for this reason.

5
6

D.

It Is Not Possible To Allow eNS Reporters

To Review Newly Filed Complaints

"Behind The Counter"
Before They Are Processed.

7
8
9

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

18
19

20
21
22
23

24
25

26
27
28

35.

It has been suggested that we could ensure more timely access to

newly filed civil unlimited complaints by allowing Ms. Krolak to go "behind the
counter" in the Civil Department and to review dropped complaints that have not
been processed, filed and approved for public viewing.

This suggestion is not

workable for a number of reasons.
36.

First, the Superior Court's security procedures were tightened

considerably after the occurrence of a shooting incident involving an Employment
Development Department employee in Oxnard. The Superior Court's current
policies prohibit members of the general public from accessing processing desks
where new civil unlimited complaints are maintained prior to processing.
37.

Second, the Superior Court cannot allow eNS or other members of the

public to review new civil unlimited complaints until they are filed to ensure that
the Court respects the privacy oflitigants.

For example, litigants who file fee

waiver requests must include personal financial information with their fee waiver
requests. These requests are kept with the complaints they accompany until after
they are assigned to a judicial officer and processed by a CPA. It would be
inappropriate to grant access to these confidential records.
38.

Allowing members of the public access to new complaints before they

are filed also violates the Superior Court's accounting protocols. New complaints
cannot be processed or filed until the plaintiff or plaintiffs have paid the proper
filing fee. Filing fees usually are paid by check, which are attached to a new
Declaration of Cheryl Kanatzar ISO

Deft's Opp. to PIfs Mot. for Prelim. Inj.

- 18 -

Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER18

ita 2:11-cv~08083~R

1
2

3
4
5
6
7

8
9
10

-MAN Document 24

Attorneys for Plaintiff
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT eOURT
CENlRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12

WESTERN DIVISION

13

Courthouse News Service,

15

Plaintiff,

16

17
18
19
20

Page 1 of 32 Page ID #:468

Rachel Matteo-Boehm (SBN 195492)
[e-mail]
David Greene (SBN 160107)
[e-mail]
Leila C. Knox (SBN 245999)
leila.knox @hro.com
HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP
560 Mission Street, Suite 250
San Francisco, CA 94105-2994
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

11

14

Filed 10/31/11

v.
Michael D. Planet, in his official
capacity as Court Executive
Officer/Clerk of the Ventura County
Superior Court.

21
Defendant.
22

CASE NO. eVII-08083 R (MANx)

PLAINTIFF COURTHOUSE NEWS
SERVICE'S OPPOSITION TO THE
MOTION TO DISMISS AND
ABSTAIN OF DEFENDANT
MICHAEL PLANET
Date:

Nov. 21, 2011
Time:
10:00 am
Courtroom: G~8 (2nd Floor)
Judge: The Hon. Manuel L. Real

23
24

25
26
27
28

PLAINTIFF COURTIIOUSE NEWS SERVICE'S
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND ABSTAIN
1t75311 vI saf

Case No. CVll-08083R (MANx)

ER19

~e

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 24 Filed 10/31f11
#:498

Page 31 of 32 Page ID

1

2008 WL 1859067, at *3 (N.D. Cal. 2008) ("[W]hen a plaintiff invokes the Court's

2

authority by filing a complaint, the public has a right to know who is invoking it, and

3

toward what purpose, and in what manner."); In re Eastman Kodak Co., 2010 WL

4

2490982 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (a complaint "is a pleading essential to the Court's

5

adjudication of the matter as well as the public's interest in monitoring the federal

6

courts.").
IV.

7
8
9

10
11
12
13
14
15

16
17
18
19
20

21

GIVEN DEFENDANT'S ASSERTION OF ELEVENTH AMENDMENT
Il\IMUNITY, COURTHOUSE NEWS CONSENTS TO THE DISMISSAL OF
ITS STATE LAW CLAIM, AND THAT CLAIM ONLY
The Eleventh Amendment grants a state defendant the power to assert a
sovereign immunity defense, barring a state law claim against it in federal court,
should it choose to do so. Wisconsin Dep't of Corrections v. Schacht, 524 U.S. 381,
389, 118 S. Ct 2047, 2052, 141 L. Ed. 2d 364,372 (1998). Defendant having now
asserted sovereign immunity over the state law claim included in the Complaint,
Courthouse News consents to the dismissal of the Third Cause of Action.
Defendant's assertion of sovereign immunity does not, however, affect the
viability of the First or Second Cause of Action, which are both federal law claims. Id.
at 389-90. See Papasan

24

25
26
27
28

Allen, 478 U.S. 265, 277-78,106 S. Ct. 2932, 92 L. Ed. 2d

209 (1986) (holding that sovereign immunity does not bar claims for prospective relief
against state defendants when such relief is based on ongoing violations of the
plaintiffs federal law rights).

22
23

v,

CONCLUSION
Defendant's motion to dismiss and abstain boils down to his positions that he
should not be required to comply with the substantive and procedural requirements of
the First Amendment right of access, and that his lack of compliance should Dot be
subject to adjudication by a federal court. Neither one has any merit.
Accordingly, Plaintiff Courthouse News Service respectfully requests that
Defendant's motion to dismiss and abstain be denied as to Courthouse News Service's
23

PLAINTIFF COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE'S
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND ABSTAIN
#75371 v1 saf

Case No. CVII-08083R (MANx)

ER20

c~

:11-cv-08083-R

1
2

3
4
5
6

-MAN

Document 21

Filed 10/20/11

Page 1 of 32 Page 10 #:395

Robert A. Naeve (State Bar No. 106095)
[e-mail]
EricaL. Reilley (State Bar No. 211615)
[e-mail]
JONES DAY
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800
Irvine, California 92612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

7

Attorneys for Defendant
MICHAEL PLANET, 1NHIS OFFICIAL
8 . CAPACITY AS COURT EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/CLERK OF THE VENTURA
9 COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12
13
14

COURTIIOUSE NEWS SERVICE,

15
16
17
18
19

20
21

Plaintiff

Case No. eVll-08083

R (MANx)

Assigned for all purposes to
Hon. Manuel L. Real

v.

MICHAEL PLANET~ IN ins
OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COURT
EXECUTIVE OFFICER/CLERK OF
THE VENTURA COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS
AND AUTHORITIES IN
SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S
MOTION TO DISMISS AND
ABSTAIN

Date:
Time:
Courtroom:

November 21, 2011
10:00 a.m.
8

22
23
24

25
26
27
28
Memo Supporting Motion to Dismiss and Abstain
Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER21

Case

:11-cv-08083-R -MAN Document 21

1
2
3

4
5
6
7

8
9
10

11
12

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

20
21

22
23

24

25
26
27

Filed 10/20/11

Page 8 of 32 Page 10 #:402

INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Courthouse News Service ("CNS"), a purportedly

widely read legal

news wire service, seeks broad declaratory and injunctive relief against Michael D.
Planet, in his official capacity as Executive Officer and Clerk of the Superior Court
of California, County of Ventura ("Mr. Planet" or the "Ventura Superior Court").
The gravamen ofCNS's

lawsuit rests on the misplaced notion that it has a

constitutional or common law right to "same-day access" to all newly filed
unlimited civil complaints.
reporter's

Specifically,

CNS complains that "any delay in the

ability to review a newly filed complaint necessarily creates delay in

[CNS's] ability to inform interested persons of the factual and legal allegations
those complaints
that purportedly

.... " (Cornpl., ~ 18 (emphasis added).)

in

eNS further complains

increasing access delays at Ventura Superior Court, and an alleged

"policy" that eNS (and every other member of the public) cannot have access to
new filings at that court until the requisite document processing is completed has
resulted in new filings being "as good as sealed," in violation of the First and
Fourteenth Amendments

to the U.S. Constitution,

federal common law, and the

California Rules of Court. (Id., ~ 6.) Thus, CNS wants nearly instantaneous

access

to all newly filed unlimited civil complaints.
CNS can cite to no case holding that the First Amendment
agency's right to "same-day access" to newly filed complaints.

protects a news
Instead, it claims

that because certain other courts are able to extend the courtesy of "same-day
access", this Court should make such access a constitutional
does not countenance

such a decree, and for good reason.

this federal district court involve itself in the administration

mandate.

But the law

First, CNS's request that
of the state's judicial

system runs afoui of settled principles of federalism, comity, and institutional
competence-all

of which urge this Court to exercise its discretion to abstain from

hearing the matter at all. Second, eNS '8 first and second claims for relief for

28
Memo Supporting Motion to Dismiss and Abstain
Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER 22

Cas

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8
9
10
11
12

13
14
15
16
17
18

2: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 21 Filed 10/20/11
#:412

Page 18 of 32

Page 10

Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70, 112-113, 115 S. Ct. 2038, 132 L. Ed. 2d 63
(1995) (O'Connor, J., concurring) ("Article III courts are constrained by the
inherent constitutional limitations on their powers. Unlike Congress, which enjoys
discretion in determining whether and what legislation is needed to secure the
guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment, federal courts have no comparable
license and must always observe their limited judicial role.") (internal citations and
quotations omitted).
Whether a case is justiciable is governed, in part, by important separation of
powers principles. See Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83,97,88 S. Ct. 1942,20 L. Ed.
2d 947 (1968). Thus, the Supreme Court has developed several related abstention

doctrines grounded in principles of comity and federalism to ensure that federal
courts do not improvidently resolve disputes and award relief that will intrude upon
the prerogatives of states to structure and fund their own governmental institutions.
See Rizzo v, Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 378-80, 96 S. Ct. 598,46 L. Ed. 2d 561 (1976)
("When a plaintiff seeks to enjoin the activity of a government agency, even within
a unitary court system, his case must contend with the well-established rule that the
Government has traditionally been granted the widest latitude in the dispatch of its
own internal affairs") (internal quotations and citations omitted).

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

A.

This Court Should Equitably Abstain From Hearing This Matter
Pursuant To O'Shea v. Littleton.

The Supreme Court first articulated the doctrine of equitable abstention in
O'Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488, 94 S. Ct. 669, 38 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1974). This
doctrine counsels federal courts to decline to exercise their equitable powers in
cases seeking to reform state institutions, because such suits offend traditional
notions of federalism by calling for "restructuring ... state government
institutions" and "dictating state or local budget priorities." O'Shea, 414 U.S. at
500; see also Horne v. Flores, 129 S. Ct. 2579, 2593, 174 LEd. 2d 406, 557 U.S.

28
_ 11 _

Memo Supporting Motion to Dismiss and
Abstain Case No. CV [ 1-08083 R (MANx)

ER23

Cas

2: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 21 Filed 10/20/11
#:418

Page 24 of 32

Page ID

1
2
3

must be granted on a "same-day basis." Pullman abstention is appropriate in this
circumstance because "federal courts owe deference to their state counterparts in
situations where public perceptions of the integrity of the state judicial system are

4

affected." Hughes v. Lipscher, 906 F.2d 961, 967 (3d Cir. 1990); see also
5

Almodovar v. Reiner, 832 F.2d 1138, 1140 (9th Cir. 1987) ("the 'sensitive social
6

7
8

policy' prong ... recognizes that abstention protects state sovereignty over matters
of local concern, out of considerations of federalism, and out of scrupulous regard
for the rightful independence of state governments").

9
10

As for the second and third Pullman factors, resolution of at least two
unsettled questions of state law could obviate the need for this action in its entirety.

11

12

As noted above, Government Code section 68150(1) already provides that court
records of all types "shall be made reasonably accessible to all members of the

13

public for viewing and duplication .....

" Cal. Gov't Code § 8150(1) (emphasis

14
added). However, as CNS and other sponsors of SB 326 have already
15
16

acknowledged, the term, "'reasonable access' is not defined under existing law."
(RJN, Ex. B at 2.)

17
18

Much the same can also be said of CNS' s third claim for relief for violation
of California Rule of Court 2.550. This Rule of Court provides that "court records

19
20

are presumed to be open," and permits trial courts to seal a court record only when
"( 1) There exists an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access to

21
22
23

the record; (2) The overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3) A substantial
probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not
sealed; (4) The proposed sealing is narrowly tailored; and (5) No less restrictive

24
25

means existto achieve the overriding interest." Cal. R.

ct. 2.550(c)

& (d); see also

Compl., ~~ 41-42 (quoting these provisions). It certainly is an open and unsettled
26

27

question whether these Rules of Court somehow recognize an enforceable right to
"same-day access" to newly filed unlimited civil complaints.

28
- 17 -

Memo Supporting Motion 10 Dismiss and
Abstain Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER24

Cas

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 21

Filed 10/20/11

Page 25 of 32

Page 10

#:419

1
2
3
4
5
6

7
8
9
10
II

12
13
14
15
16

As explained in greater detail below (see infra Section III), the Eleventh
Amendment precludes a federal court from ruling on eNS's
event, a state court ruling requiring "same-day
civil complaints pursuant to Government

In any

state-law claim.

access" to newly filed unlimited

Code section 68150(1) or Rule of Court

2.550 would, of necessity, obviate the need for this Court to rule on the First
Amendment

issues CNS presses here. Pullman abstention is warranted for this

reason. See C-Y Dev. Co. v. Redlands, 703 F.2d 375, 377-78 (9th Cir. 1983)
("[T]he assumption which justifies abstention is that a federal court's erroneous
determination

of a state law issue may result in premature or unnecessary

constitutional

adjudication,

and unwarranted

interference with state programs and

statutes. A state law question that has the potential of at least altering the nature of
questions is thus an essential element of Pullman

the federal constitutional
abstention.")

(citation omitted); Canton, 498 F.2d at 845 ("With regard to elements

(2) and (3) [of the Pullman abstention test], it is crucial that the uncertainty
state law be such that construction

in the

of it by the state courts might obviate, or at least

delimit, decision of the federal (constitutional)

question.").

17
18
19

II.

eNS'S FIRST AND SECOND CLAIMS FOR RELIEF FAIL TO
STATE A CLAIM FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL OR FEDERAL
COMMON LA W "RIGHT" OF SAME-DAY ACCESS TO NEWLY
FILED UNLIMITED CIVIL COMPLAINTS.

20
Even if 0 'Shea and Pullman abstention doctrines could not be invoked here,
21
CNS's first and second claims for relief should be dismissed for failure to state a

22

claim as a matter of law. As noted above, eNS alleges that it has both a

23
constitutional

and common-law

right of access to court records, and that such

24
access must be timely.

(CompJ., ~~ 32, 37.) Ventura Superior Court does not

25
dispute either proposition;

as discussed above, even the California Government

26
Code mandates "reasonable

access" to all court records.

Cal. Gov't Code

27
§ 68150(1). But CNS then takes the unsupportable
28
_ 18 _

leap that timely access to court
Memo Supporting Motion to Dismiss and
Abstain Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER 25

Cas 2:11-cv-08083-R

1
2

-MAN

Document 21 Filed 10/20/11
#:420

Page 26 of 32

Page 10

records equates to "same-day access". (CompI.,.,-r~32,37.) No such right exists
under the law.

3
4
5

A.

The First Claim For Relief Should Be Dismissed Because The First
Amendment Does Not Guarantee Same-Day Access.
1.

6
7

First Amendment Public Rights Of Access To Court
Records Are Governed By "Experience And Logic."

In Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555,579-81, 100 S. Ct.

8

2814,65 L. Ed. 2d 973 (1980), the Supreme Court held for the first time that the

9

First Amendment gave the press and public an affirmative qualified right of access

10
11

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

to criminal court proceedings. The Court identified two related criteria for
evaluating First Amendment right of access, id. at 588-89 (Brennan, Marshall, JJ,
concurring), which it later termed "considerations of experience and logic:" (1)
whether the place and process have historically been open to the press and general
public (i.e., "experience"); and (2) whether public access plays a significant
positive role in the functioning of the particular process in question (Le., "logic").
Press-Enterprise Co. v, Superior Court, 478 US 1, 8, 106 S. Ct. 2735, 92 L. Ed. 2d
1 (1986) (Press-Enterprise II). Both criteria must be satisfied to establish a
qualified right to access. CNS cannot satisfy either.

2.

Historic "Experience" Does Not Recognize A Right To
Same-Day Access To Court Records.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

a. There Is No Historic Right To Same-Day Access As A
Matter Of Law.
Since Richmond, the Supreme Court has revisited the First Amendment right
of access only in the context of criminal proceedings. See Globe Newspaper Co. v.
Superior Court, 457 U.S. 596, 606-11, 102 S. Ct. 2613, 73 L. Ed. 2d 248 (1982)
(closing proceedings during testimony of underage rape victim unconstitutional);
Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court, 464 U.S. 501, 508-13, 104 S. Ct. 819, 78
L. Ed. 2d 629 (1984 ) (closing voir dire in criminal case unconstitutional in light of

28
_ 19 _

Memo Supporting Motion to Dismiss and
Abstain Case No. CV 11-08083 R(MANx)

ER 26

~e
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

2: 11-cv-08083-R -MAN

Document 21-1

Filed 10120/11

Page 1 of 3 Page [D

#:427

Robert A. Naeve (State Bar No. 106095)
[e-mail]
EricaL. Reilley (State Bar No. 211615)
[e-mail]
JONES DAY
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800
Irvine, California 92612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
MICHAEL PLANET, IN IDS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS COURT EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/CLERK OF 1HE VENTURA
COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12
13
14

COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE,

15
16
17
18
19

20
21

Plaintiff,
v.
1\{lCHAEL PLANET, IN HIS
OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COURT
EXECUTIVE OFFICER/CLERK OF
TIIE VENTURA COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT,
Defendant.

Case No. eVII-08083

R (MANx)

Assigned for all purposes to
Hon. Manuel 1.Real
DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF
MOTION AND MOTION TO
DISMISS AND ABSTAIN
Date:
November 21, 2011
Time:
10:00 am.
Courtroom: 8

22
23
24
25

26
27
28
Motion to Dismiss and Abstain
Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER27

2a

1
2

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 21-1
#:428

TO ALL PARTIES

Filed 10/20/11

AND THEIR ATTORNEYS

Page 2 of3

Page ID

OF RECORD:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on November 21,2011,

at 10:00 a.m., or as

3

soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in Courtroom 8 of the above-entitled

4

court, located at 312 N. Spring St., Los Angeles, California 90012, defendant

5

Michael D. Planet, in his official capacity as Executive Officer and Clerk of the

6

Superior Court of California, County of Ventura, will and hereby does move the

7

Court as follows:

8

1.

9

To abstain and to dismiss Plaintiff Courthouse News Services ("CNS")
Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief in its entirety pursuant

10

to the equitable abstention doctrine enunciated in 0 'Shea v. Littleton,

11

414 U.S. 488 (1974);

12

2.

To abstain and to dismiss CNS's Complaint for Injunctive and

13

Declaratory Relief in its entirety pursuant to the abstention doctrine

14

enunciated in Railroad Comm 'n of Texas v. Pullman Co., 312 U.S. 496

15

(1941);

16

3.

To dismiss eNS's First Claim for Relief for Violation of the First

17

Amendment to the United States Constitution, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

18

1983, because there is no mandatory, constitutional "right" to same-

19

day access to newly filed unlimited civil complaints;

20

4.

To dismiss CNS's Second Claim for Relief For Violation of Federal

21

Common Law, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, because there is no

22

mandatory, common-law "right" to same-day access to newly filed

23

unlimited civil complaints; and

24

5.

To dismiss eNS's

Third Claim for Relief for violation of California

25

Rule of Court 2.550 because it is barred by the Eleventh Amendment

26

to the United States Constitution.

27
28

The motion is based on this Notice of Motion, the concurrently filed
Memorandum

of Points and Authorities and Request for Judicial Notice, and all
- 1-

Motion to Dismiss and Abstain
Case No. CV 11-0&083R(MANx)

ER28

£§

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 21-1

Filed 10120/11

Page 3 of 3 Page 10

#:429

1
2

other pleadings and papers filed herein, and any additional argument the Court may
consider at the hearing on this motion.

3

4

Dated: October 20, 2011

Respectfully submitted,

5

JONES DAY

6

By: lsi Robert A. Naeve
Robert A. Naeve

7

Attorneys for Defendant
MICHAEL PLANET, IN HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS COURT EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/CLERK OF THE VENTURA
COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

8
9

10
11

LAI-JJ5l864

12
13
14

15

16
17

18
19

20

21
22
23
24
25

26
27

28
Motion to Dismiss and Abstain

- 2-

Case No_ CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER29

caS€)

1

:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 22

Filed 10/20/11

5

Attorneys for Defendant

7

J\.1ICHAEL PLANE!h-.~ HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS COuKT EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/CLERK OF THE VENTURA

8

Page ID #:433

Robert A. Naeve (State Bar No. 106095)
[e-mail]
Erica L. Reilley tState Bar No. 211615)
e1reilleyra>.i nesday .com
o
JONESlJAY
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite SOO
Irvine CA 92612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

6

Page 1 of 4

COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

2

3
4

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12
13

COURTHOUSE

16
17
18
19

v.
MICHAEL PLANET IN IDS
.
OFFICIAL CAP ACIiY AS COURT

EXECUTIVE

OFFICER/CLERK

Case No. eVIl-08083

R (MANx)

Assigned for all purposes to
Hon. Manuel L. Rem

Plaintiff,

14

15

NEWS SERVICE,

OF

THE VENTURA COUNTY

SUPERIOR COURT,
Defendant.

DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR
JUDICIAL NOTICE IN
SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
DISMISS AND ABSTAIN
Date:
Time:
Courtroom:

November 21,2011
10:00 a.m.
8

II-------------------------~

20
21
22
23

24
25
26
27
28

Request for Judicial Notice in Support of
Motion to Dismiss and Abstain
Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER 30

Case

1

:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document22

Filed 10/20/11

Page2of4

PageID#:434

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201, and in support of his concurrently

2

filed Motion to Dismiss and Abstain, defendant Michael D. Planet, in his official

3

capacity as Executive Officer and Clerk of the Superior Court of California,

4

of Ventura, respectfully requests that the Court take judicial notice ofthe following

5

documents:

6

1.

7
8

County

California Senate Bill 326, from the 2011-2002
Regular Session (as amended September 1, 2011),
available at http://\\WW.Ieginfo.cagov/pub/ll12/billlsen/sb - 0301-0350/sb 326 - bill - 20110901
_amended _asm _v9 5.pdf. A true and correct copy
of this document is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
-

9
10

11

2.

The California Senate Judiciary Committee's May
3,2011 Bill Analysis of Senate Bill 326 (as
amended April 25, 2011), available at
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov /publ 11-12/bill/sen/s b_
0301-0350/sb - 326 - cfa - 20110502 - 142806 -sen
comm.htmL A true and correct copy of this
document is attached hereto as Exhibit B.

3.

Letter from the Judicial Council of California,
Administrative Office ofthe Courts, to the Senate
Judiciary Committee, dated Apri127, 2011. A true
and correct copy of this document is attached
hereto as Exhibit C.

4.

Letter from the Judicial Council of California,
Administrative Office of the Courts, to the
Assembly Judiciary Committee, dated June 9,
20 II. A true and correct copy of this document is
attached hereto as Exhibit D.

5.

The Bill History of California Senate Bil1326, from
the 2011-2002 Regular Session, available at
http://wwwJeginfo.ca.gov/pub/ll12/bill/senlsb - 0301-0350/sb ~ 326 - bill 2011 090 I_history .html. A true and correct copy of
this document is attached hereto as Exhibit E.

6.

Letter from the Judicial Council of California.

12

13
14
15
16

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Request for Judicial Notice in Support of
Motion to Dismiss and Abstain
Case No_CV 11·08083 R (MANx)

ER31

ca~

:11-cv~08083~R -MAN

1

Document 22

Filed 10/20/11

Page 3 of 4 Page ID #:435

Administrative Office of the Courts, to the Senate
Judiciary Committee, dated August 8,2011. A true
and correct copy ofthis document is attached
hereto as Exhibit F.

2
3
4

"A court shall take judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with

5

6
7
8
9
10

the necessary information."

be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known
within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and
ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot be reasonably
questioned."

13
14

15
16
17
18
19
20

Fed. R. Evid. 201(b).

The Court "may take judicial notice of court filings and other matters of

11
12

Fed. R. Evid. 201(d). "A judicially noticed fact must

public record." Reyn 'sPasta Bella, LLC v. Visa USA, Inc., 442 F 3d 741, 746 n.6
(9th Cir. 2006). Exhibits A, B, and E are matters of public record. Further, they are
not reasonably subject to dispute. Thus, they are the proper subject of judicial
notice pursuant to Rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
The Court may also take judicial notice of the contents of administrative
bodies' records, as well as those documents that establish the dates upon which the
administrative

bodies take action, where the record's contents or the action's dates

are not subject to reasonable dispute.

See City a/Las Vegas, Nev. v. F.A.A., 570

F.3d 1109, fn. 1 (9th Cir. 2009) (taking judicial notice of document that established
date administrative

office approved waiver); Jimenez v. Domino's Pizza, Inc., 238

21

22
23
24

25
26
27
28

F.R.D. 241, 246 (C.D. Cal. 2006) (taking judicial notice of contents of opinion
letter issued by Division of Labor Standards Enforcement).

Exhibits C, D, and F

are records from the Judicial Council of California, Administrative
Courts.

Office of the

Further, their existence is not reasonably subject to dispute. Thus, they are

the proper subject of judicial notice.

IIII
IIII

-2-

Request for Judicial Notice in Support of
Motion to Dismiss and Abstain
Case No. CV 11·08083 R (MANx)

ER32

c~~ :11-cv-OB083-R
1

-MAN

Document 22

Filed 10/20/11

Page 4 of 4 Page 10 #:436

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant requests that, in considering and ruling

2

upon his concurrently filed Motion to Dismiss and Abstain, the Court take judicial

3

notice of Exhibits A through F, attached hereto.

4

Dated:

October 20, 2011

JONES DAY

5
6

By: /s/ Robert Naeve
Robert A. Naeve

7

Attomeys for Defendant
MICHAEL PLANET, IN
OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COURT
EXECUTIVE OFFICER/CLERK OF
THE VENTURA COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT

8

ms

9
10
11
12

LAI-3151596

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

25
26

27

28
-3-

Request for Judicial Notice in Support of
Motion to Dismiss and Abstain
Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER33

cSt4e 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 22-1
#:437

Filed 10/20/11

Page 1 of 24

Page 10

E xnm IT A

ER34

Base 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 2 of 24 Page 10

#:438

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER

1, 2011

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 22,201 I
AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 10,2011
AMENDED 1N SENATE APRil. 25,2011

SENATE BILL

No. 326

Introduced by Senator Vee
(Coauthor: Assembly Member Dickinson)
February 14,2011

An act to add Chapter 1.45 (commencing with Section 68180) to
Title 8 of the Government Code, relating to courts.
LEGISLATIVE

COUNSEL'S

DIGEST

SB 326, as amended, Vee. Court records: public access.
Existing law requires the Judicial Council to adopt rules of court to
establish the standards and guidelines for the creation, maintenance,
reproduction, and preservation of court records, and requires that these
standards and guidelines reflect industry standards for each medium
used, ensure the accuracy and preserve the integrity of the records, and
ensure that the public can access and reproduce the records. Specifically,
unless access is otherwise restricted by law, court records created,
maintained., preserved, or reproduced under specified provisions are
required to be made reasonably accessible to all members of the public
for viewing and duplication, and electronic court records must be
viewable at the court, whether or not they are accessible remotely.
Additionally, rules of court require courts to provide public access to
electronic records, as specified.
This bill would require the Judicial Council, in consultation with
stakeholder groups, and within 18 months of the date of enactment of
95

A4

ER35

9@se 2:11-cv-08083-R

SB326

-MAN

Document 22-1
#:439

Filed 10/20111

Page 3 of 24

Page 10

-2-

this act, to adopt a rule of court to require courts to provide the public
with same-day access to case-initiating civil and criminal court records,
as defined, at no cost to the requester, for viewing at the courthouse.
The bill would require the rule te aH6w Ii eourt to eharge a fi6fil:i:nal fee
fur providing a eopy 6£ these reooMs.
Vote: majority. Appropriation:
no. Fiscal committee:
yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1
2
3
4

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

12
13
14

15
16

17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24

25
26
27

SECTION l. The Legislature finds and declares all of the
following:
(a) Timely public access to court records and documents as
public documents is an important right and necessity for an
informed citizenry.
(b) The use of new electronic technologies for filing court
actions and modem.izing access to court records can, while intended
to streamline and improve court functions and public access to
court records, actually result in delays in access to court documents,
(c) Delays in public access to court documents and filings should
be minimized, therefore ensuring free flow of public information
in a timely and cost-effective manner. .
(d) Delays in public access to case-initiating documents have a
special significance because those documents are the means by
which the public becomes aware that the powers of the judiciary
have been invoked with respect to a particular controversy or crime.
However, the use of electronic technologies for filing court actions
and modernizing access to court records have in many instances
had the unintended consequence of increasing delays in access to
those case-initiating court records.
(e) It is the intent of the Legislature to ensure, as California's
courts move forward to implement various electronic filing and
other technologies, that case-initiating documents, as well as other
court filings and documents, continue to be availab le to the pub lie
on a timely basis.
SEC. 2. Chapter 1.45 (commencing with Section 68180) is
added to Title 8 of the Government Code, to read:

95

A5

ER36

~e

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 22-1
#:440

-31

2
3
4
5

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38

39
40

CHAPTER

1.45.

ACCESS TO CASE-INITIATING

Filed 10/20/11

Page 4 of 24 Page 10

8B326
TRIAL COURT

RECORDS

68180. The following definitions apply to this chapter:
(a) (1) "Case-initiating civil and criminal court records" means
all of the following:
(A) Any complaint or petition in an unlimited civil case, as
defined in Section 88 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(B) Any writ petition, as provided for in Title 1 (commencing
with Section 1067) of Part 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(C) Any indictment, information, or complaint in felony and
misdemeanor criminal actions.
(2) "Case-initiating civil and criminal court records" includes
both electronic and nonelectronic records.
(3) For the purposes of this chapter, "case-initiating civil and
criminal court records" does not include records that are sealed or
proposed to be sealed by court order and are confidential in
accordance with Rules 2.5 50 and 2.551 of the California Rules of
Court, or that are otherwise made confidential by law, including,
but not limited to, juvenile court records made confidential by
Section 827 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, Child Support
Case Registry Forms, as developed by the Judicial Council pursuant
to Section 4014 of the Family Code, adoption records made
confidential by Section 9200 of the Family Code, pleadings in
child custody proceedings
containing
information
made
confidential by Section 3429 of the Family Code, determination
of parentage records made confidential by Section 7643 of the
Family Code, child and spousal support enforcement program
records made confidential by Section 17212 of the Family Code,
or any other case-initiating document that is confidential by law.
(b) "Public" means an individual, a group, or an entity,
including, but not limited to, the print or electronic media, or the
representative of an individual, group, or entity.
68181.
(a) The Judicial Council, in consultation
with
stakeholder groups, shall adopt, within 18 months of the date of
enactment of the act adding this section, a rule or rules 0 f court to
require courts to provide the public with same-day access to
case-initiating civil and criminal court records, at no cost to the
requester, for viewing at the courthouse. To the extent possible
and practicable, the rule or rules shall provide for same-day access

95

A6

ER 37

GiSe 2: 11-cv-08083-R -MAN

SB326
1

2
3

4
5

6
7

8
9
10
11
12

13
14

15

Document 22-1
#:441

Filed 10/20/11

Page 5 of 24 Page ID

-4-

to those records that are received by the court within 30 minutes
of the court closing for that day. However, in no case shall these
records be made available later than 60 minutes after the court
opens the next court day.
(b) The role or nHeS shall ItUm'. a eom'!; to eharge It ftflmiIHIl fee
for providing It copy efthese reeords, ira eopy is reqtlested !lUbe
eourt:house.

fe}
(b) The Legislature specifically recognizes the importance of
timely access not just to case-initiating civil and criminal court
records, but to all court records and documents. Nothing in this
statute or in the rule or rules of court to be adopted pursuant to this
statute may be construed to limit or otherwise negatively affect
the public'S right of timely access to court records as a general
matter.

o
95

A7

ER38

ooe 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 6 of 24 Page ID

#:442

EXHIBITB

ER39

Document 22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 7 of 24pJgeg~fij

#:443

BILL

ANALYSIS

SEN,II,t'E

JODICIAAY

COHKIT'lEE

Seo..ar.or: Noreen Evans, Chair
20,11-2012. Re:glllcu: Sessio.ll

S''B 326 Ueet
As Ameode<l
Apdl 15. 20U
He.;u:-lP9 D"te; Hay J 2:011
Fi.!!cal: YeB
t1~4:'nt;:y: N-o
110
I

IJE'sC1HP'tlQU

'l'h5.s :1;11.11
would cecut re the: J~d.icial. Council of California to
adopt a rul@ or rules of cQurt to eequdee ~Ok.lt"r:'$ to p.rovide
pmhlic access to cu'e.-i..nit.t8ting civil and crimina 1 court
.r:'Il:t;Qrds a,& de fined., by no latex
~
tha.n [.he: end Df t.he. day on
wll1ch. tihcee records are rl!.ceive-d by the ccur-t; ,

____

Court.:il have lon~ beld t.hi'lt the public has 6 r1-ght. of access to
CD'Ilrt
eeeeeds , The C.al!,,Eol'nia SUpJ:e.me
CoUJ:t
stated
tb.et "it.. is
a fi~9t p,rine.ip!e tb.a.t the peo;ple hllllJOthe :;I.9'h.t to know what is
dane Ln t.hc:1r oaurtl>.'·
lIn- to Sha-rtcidq(! r18931 9'9 Cal. SZIi.~
S.::JD.I
PUblic
a.cc:u,s
ls n.Cc.e:ll::l'II':Y beeaun. -if public:
court
i;tD.::it.ne:1:!1 t:DlIdul;b!:d in priv"'t~,
is
it bel;OIQB 1.mpQuible 1:0
expose (XJ.["[UptiOl'l1Lncom.petcRce,
ineff1eiCl1c.y,
pLsjudice
alld
favot"Lt.iB:D."
~E.:!irilte: t
o
rst. v , 'l'ElIIste."s of Hei!lrat
T~st.fllllel'ltary l'rust
(L917) 61 Cal.App.ld
1'17, 184.,
l

u...

The .:dqht qf public. e1CCe.8'S court
to
reccede
begin:!! wb~Q. th.e
cour-t; recoEd is :filed with the court.
(Bi1Inlc. Jl.merlci!J.Naticnal
of'
'r.ruat; " Savin9$- AssoC'btion
v , ftDtel Qittenhcuse
As.sClch.te.s
IIS'"86, 900 F _2d 319, 3t5.)
FuttherE
~t'vJ nLle the 'CDlJLts haYe an
illhl!.:t'ent right
to .cont.rQll their own EI!.OQrcl$~
p.ri!!clu:iiiian fb)Ol
public
inspection
is ~rmi tted
on.1y upon a .5IhDlirllRg
that
n'l'e.lat.1oa would. te:ud to unde.t:mine individual
91!.C::Ur1.t.1r'.
persona.l
libl'!!"rty, OJ: prive.te
p[,qperty,
Dr injar-e the public
or the pubUe
good.(Olpllt}' PreHIii, Ine. 'V'. Superior
Court 115'92] Ii
(m,n::e)

u
SB 326
Pa.qll!!! 2

I Yell!.}

of ~

CoIILAp'p.hh

106,

UL~

I!,ltho-ugt:l the public
Il.ss a weU-foUlIded
dqht
Q.t:
A(;Ge811
to cou.tt
records,
the author reports
incEeasinq
delays in pllblil:: access
to r:aurt. records.
t"olchsome. caurf.1ji a:p~ rl!"t1y delaying! public
...
acce..:s'
til':! a.u mocb
CIS o.ne ~nth
to J: newly fUed
complalnt&..
"J:his bill.. spoP50red by Cl'IllfDJ'nian! Awa.,-e., CO\\ct.bQtl5e News
Se~ice,
end t.he E'iur. .ll.lQendl:aentCflo!Ll1
t.1on, would cequi re the
judi.ci.al
CCI1.1inr: of c:a.lifo.rnia
il
to ildopt II rlllll!!! or kUloilS I'>f court
to require cauru
to provide public l!Ioc:eu to Ga.le-initia,=-ing
r:::l'lri.l alLd I:'rimlna.l court .:J:I!QOrd:!1t B..fi defined, by no later thaD.
tne ~nd of t'tl.l: dl!l;yon whicb those records
:!It!!
reoeived
by the
court.
CHAl!GES

TO

EXISTING

LAI4

£oI'tistinq law
r!the Cali fornh COD.lljt.itu.tlon..
.r!.9h.t of acces 5' to in'forJlillt.1on concerning
the
:people"
bu&in'l!sc.
(Cal. ColUiit.~ art. I. sec.
Existing
r:e5ttict.ed.

la.w provide.!!
by

l.elw.

~Cl'ur't

tbat,.

declares
conduct
3.)

r.he pe.ople·:5
ot t::h~

'\lDie.:ss access
is othe'%'Wise
shall be r:a"de I:eal!ia.oably
public
tOE ri".,.,ing
and
fODl~
tGov. CQc!e.Sec.

r4!:card.,s

accessiPle
1.0 ~ll
Illem.;.ers (if th.e
d.1Jpl.ic:.aU.on in pape.I: or elec:trooic
69150111.1

r:x::lst:i.ng law provides
tbat c:'Ourt records 5eI:Jhd by court order
are nor. ope.n t.Q publlc inspectlou.
leal. Ruh:s of court,
rl,l,le
2.550.1

E.1tistin,g b..... p.rovides that~ unlesf. ~p.f:iden~iill)' ty 18 required
la.... court
recard .. are. p.rti!s~d
to be OpeD. (Cal. Rules n!
1.1 t't , ,["Ille 2.5050.J

by

Co

Thi:i bill

would define

"case-1ni.tiiltinq

eivil

;and c["iIr1irtAl C;:CU[t

B8

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/publll-12lhill/sen/sb

_0301-0350/sb _326_cfa _20110502_1428...

1011312011

ER40

Document 22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 8 of 24

#:444

prgwpdfS

cel!oros" t.o 1I2ah.!
ll) any camplai:at or 'Petition. .fi1ed. in .an
\lUlilrlt.ed civil CBI!IG!:;
(2J any petitian
fDr.
-writ of rE!1l'lew'; nd
a
(3) 8f1Y indietru~t.
infQ.[la.;:I:tioDr
01: couplll.lnt
in. .te.loc.y and
1IIi~&1'IIo-r
cr~ClL.i.Qal IlcciDb:S.
This dafi.bit.i<lll
'k!,ol11d lhel.udc
botb electrQtuc
-and EtonelectrolJnic 1:ecords.
TbH bill

wDuLdpz:ovidll: tbat

COUJ:t. recD.t"ds-

does

nat.

,jC-el;Je.-initb.tiAog

lnclode

rOcol::ds

:lit!i'lled

civil
or

and cEillllihal

p["QPC~

t.o

b-e

a
SO J~6

(Ye.el
of ~

.P'1'.Iqe: 3

s~e.led. by eeuet; oJ;'dc:r ana e ce confiNnU"l
u.nr;ier el'fillting la,\or.
includ1cq but not liIuited. to. certain juvenile court J:e:cDrd~"
adoption reccrds , child cllstocy pl.eadinqs, e.nd child ilnd liiPou.sal
.:5Llppol:t. enforceeenr records.
Ibis- bill
woul.d tl!!quire the .Judlclal. CouncIL to adopt a zule. utCU1~5
of CDurt to t'equire ccce t.e t.o provide publi.c access: t.a
c:ase-.initlatin"
civil
alld c:rint.in-d
court .t"ecords on tile: SDlII!!: ay
d
an 'i'fhid these reccees veec .flIed in either j:laper ar ekeet.ren.i e
fODD_

st..t.ed

L

nll!.p.d LD.r' tlle

bill

trJhe. prohlem too be rlli!llL8di.~ is 8 d£iI1llti~ and lo;"ililespre.Bd
deteri.Q:rllltioQ in the tilPoe~in.9Si of ;public- eeeee s to cottrt
eecc eds , In. the eeae Df newly Ei1ed t;:ivil e:OII1pll'lint!'l,
a deh.y
iII eeeeee effeetively
hide& frolll the: public the fact that a
new lawsuit
has bll!:~l1initiated
..
!l'bc.:!llc:
d.ellL)'.:IIll. ILI;Oe.S are .an 'Obvious um.ttl!!r Qf concenl
tCi the
Jleri8 aqediGJ 1&0 a.re dep.riw:d o.f the abIlity t.a infuDrI other
intert:'sted.
1!l~:IIIlIli!:E-st.he: public
af"
OIl the
bulio1nll!.s.s. the caurt.s
of
while it is $ti-l~ llew8worthy.
They are 61150II probleJU Cot the
pattj II!:S to th~ proc:eedlng ~ "lho ftlay nut be ilhle. t.o leam DbDut
a court Ulillg
tbat dikl!eT..1y ImpiiJcts them until theY' receive
.liI'rr\fSr;e of tbe tiling
days - Cit even o;.:eel"s - la.ter.
And
ddaylS in aCCI!::I5".9 ..1.90 impact tbose in the business O!:Ind
may
leg'.al
COIIdInJD1ty Who JIb101 be ind!t'"lKtly
atfel;tBd by H le9i'!1!
p~CII;:Ilng.

E"tflol!!llly,delays In 1lc::r:e..!I.!'!i:
blnde~ Lhe publicls .ability
ta
ovenee
the .s.c:tlV'lde.a of iMI l1Qponan't
bt'&ncb of government
while thDse a..etivltiu
are. liitill
c::"~r'!i!nt., thu.s il'tlfJaitinq the
Rllt"90ve~t
tl..llt i.5 1'1'0e5sentiiill
to t1J.e. tD.ftCt:ion.ing' (If O'u['
demc.:rat1c foRI. 0 r qovernment.
Courtbouse

tielol'sService,

a .sponso.,r

Df

this

bill,

writes:

Courtho\lse
Ne"fS haG: directly
eHpe.rienced
the: de'te.rio.ratign
of
ti.me~~ iLC'CC:fla t:.bll!civil
lo
cou£t rt::com.
1't5 l::e:poEtel:l!I make
£eqU.laJ:'(ir:l many easelS, Qa.ily~ in-person
vis! ts to l;Ourtbo\lse.l
th1'ougbou[ Cdifat'l:tla [0 rev 1•.., newly filed: civil ccmphil'ltll
and d~t~cm.i.JJ,e wtLLdi. ones .. ed t ~s
COVeJ:""qll'l
When CQurtho1;lse

a
5B 326

r'rel!!)

Page 4 of ?

N~5

hiLl!i cncubElte.:.:ec!

acc:eSB

dll:!:~o!/.YD"~
i'ts

first

15'tep

h.a.cJ

Clh,I:I.!{.s

been tel try to ,esolve
tho.,e d.elt:lYILLtMouqh
oooper.a.tlvcdbC::U8doll.5 ",ic.h CDw:t 5tm.ff'..
In the: past,
I:be5e -e£fo;["lt15
have
worked well, o"uillly
le:adlnq
to ,s-alutiol'l..s th&t ensured
t.h~t
intl!refitl!d personS" could .r~it!w -lind c~rt
ORnew cIvil
o:apla1nts
in a ti.me.ly manner without
llnposi:nq any 31qn1,ticanr.
cast or bu[den on CQU[lts.
In tbe b.st
fe .....YQiil.r-lil, .O\oIe ....er, Courthouse
b
Ne'Js has seen a
.fllnd.a.!llen.tal sbl.ft
ill. the. landscape:..
ProeQd.W:Qs mat
trad.ltiolULlly
prgrnoted timely
ac.-ceS5" ...rt'! ..,~ceremoniou$ly
dhmantld
Q~ se&1ed hlLelc'.
And while CourthoUSE NewElhas
cantinued
LLs; attempt-& to resolv-e theiJe p[:obleJlUi throuqb
dhc.u.!IIsioll:i with court st..aff .. these I!.ffcnt-li'
o~e bel!onl.iCl9'
im::;I'e4sinqiy Ullprnduct.ive..
~peated..ly,
CII
liolut1,on reached
a..fr.er months Df' lofC'I:k
witb a particular
court a.dmi.l1h I:rat.or
dhint.eqnLtes
BS soon as he or she leaves the c::OLl-rt a.nd the.
d~h_ys re-t:u.rn" ot::be.t C(lI,IJ::ts hay" simply ~e.cu!'ied tQ imprn ....
e
ac:c:es 5 a.ltogethe.r.
I

2.

Providing

s;une-day pnbl.1C" a~g;:.sS"~D gmrt

records

prOVide a~OIUiiIi Lo
cELGe-init.iating
ci.vil
and c:rilrlm:d t:=O\lt't recoros: oIJnth-e same c2y
on "Which. the court
recaras wer-e filed
with. the court.
Existing
l.-.w prgvicks the publi~ wit.h reasoDab1e. access to court .rec:ords.
IGov. CDd~ Sec. 6.1S0~) HQ..,ever, "'['ea:JoEl~blo1!
iJce~lI5""
i.oS not
Q'I'.:fincd -under existing 11:1.w. Propolle.tlts!;lf
this bill
<11:"9"ue
t.h.at,

Tbi£

bU.l

would

requi.r:fI'

cou:rt.s

~Q

B9

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/l1-12Ibill/senlsb_0301-0350/sb_326_cfa_20110502_1428...

10/1312011

ER41

Document 22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 9 of 24 p~gt,~

#:445

while scee cccrre ...re provid1ng same-da:t eeeeas t.o CCRJrt
eeeeeas r "any Qther courts have f'ailed and r~f\lsl!:d to .p rovtcte e
syst.eln wherebv t.b.e: publil; has access to eourt N<:O.t'd. nfO[1DcltioJ:l
i
in iL t:imt!!ly ~r
_ The 5pODSOr::r.
I:I!:PDl:t.
thaI[ courts
ez-e
cl.aimi7UJ t.hllt the lise of al4tetronlli;. l::echnolDgU!:.lS
f(lc fillt1.g1
eeuzt; aet:iooB and lDOderni:r;ing eeeees to eou.[t ce~nls
he:v !!: i'l'l.
m.Jny
inl!il:aD.ces
inC7'6Bl5"c:d
~lay:s:
in. a.ccea&
t.a su.::b
ca-Sle·-inlti~ti.ng court zeeerds ,
Thill!Jud1eial
C:CJu:ncU~
an opponent. of this: billr
.e-t&tes t.bat kbe
$ame-day eeeesa pra.vlslon. ot this blll "woul.d be compl~tely
unl,lOrkablo!!! for the. courts.
piili:'t:1.cuudy
'it1Vf!n the judicia.l
brliLnchrs- cur.reet; fi!i~l
s;itu~tiOllt and 'IOwa .ctU&lly i.~de
p..m.ll-r: access II=D c;lQUrt reoards _ . . . SB J26 l5e.ta .. 5tBndal:'d. for
aeeees
th ... C!!innot. be ::.chi8'Vllild wi tlrout II signiH':8rl.t
t
incr~:liU!!! .in
eouee sl:"affil'lg t.o a-ccomplhb th,l. objective ....
Ie.questing a
court :record: filed 1II.i..Duh.lbefore !;.he court I;'la:seG:to be
ftVailllble
to the public
tha.t same. day at the c:ouEthc.u.se. h

11
5:8 326

(Y~e)

Page: 5 of

liimply

ill

?

loqistic-u.l

i..mpos.sihility.'r

argues t.luit the courts; in Y'Qars past bolLVe ::diaply
pl
day's COUrt. r~cords "in a d.e:siqJIa'l;ed'JIlt!:dia
bin that
repo~teJ:1!i '\liQuId. che.ck Bt the e.nd of the day as pan 0 f their
~equliiit.:t cour'tbollse- news beat....
ltoweVI!!J::.
lliollU! ulllCU now clai.lll
c
'they A.re unable to ~rov.idf!' imll\P:;d!At::e: a~ess
to CQ'I;IrtrecQ.d$
th.I:ough tb@ lM'di!ll bin pEoc:ess.
proponent..!i of this bill
a~ue
that olll!! coSlt-effactive
Wily to ~t:ovide s~-o.s.y
public
accel5S 'to
noewly fi~ed c:our:t r:'ROOroS
:is to :r-equl n! tile t:ilinq part.ill!!s to
p.Eovid-e allj addItiDnal
copy of tha doc::uatents be.l.nq filed~ which
wQuld :be pli!lced iDtc a bin far publil; a~&:&.
-rile

4utbor
.. ~rl
the

Tb.llt PEopose.d alt.e.rna~ive. J:.. !ses .e.Vt!r8ll iogistic.u
.and othe..r
i 51!1u.es, ho~vc:r.
EKiatinq h'N t"eqvire.s c.ourt rllt;OmS to be
e.rca tcd apd maint;,.ined
in a ZMnDCl: tbat en.a:ure& aCcUl:D-cy "nd
pre1JeEVe.e.
t.hl'!. .h.t.1II9d
ty g r the ('eJI;a4d.6 th.i;'ouqhclLlt tnei..:
rr.OIlntenanc:.e.
I!Ind th.e:.se COll.l:t.[ecordJs D'lU&t be inde~e:d fQ~
ccnven i ent M:~:liS.
CGIOlV. Cade $I"'d. 68150 L)
'the Jud.ic:ial
Ccllncll arques th.at e.Kir;:tin'J la .... requiroel!l nelo/ly filed coUrt
Eec:ards to be ere.bld
and maintailled
l"'1:aped),.
anCl providing
bin with
cophl5 o.:f tHlE:ge reCQrds
for tbe p'Pltl1~'s
~1I1aw and.
potent.llli
d,i-li;i.nt.9~IIt.iaD f tbe.:se. cou:tt :t"e-coL"d-copie5
a
contravenes
the public I 5 IIcceSS to the 1;QPlPh:t.l'l
k"t!:coJ::d.:l. Mi!l.ny
c::cll.rt..!I aL"1:!::
und.e.l"staffed.
aDd woul.d be IJnl!ble to pitovidl'!
a..ddlt.lonal stan
to svpe['vise the c:alit't r"cards copy bin to
pDliee th.e public· s rl!!!v1.e"" f the records
o
i)

I

Ful:tber,
copies g.f doc.~n'tPi tna!:. arl!! conf1d.e:n.tial by ope.I:atlon
of law mu:e;;t ba flag'ged
.and. separated
trO'!DCDU['t .rerord.a that
would bf! placed in the pllbLic. :tl!i!!-vi~ bill.
Molt iGpJrtat&t11 •
.requi..r.iniJ filing
Piu;t.ill..I:
t-D prdvide
an. additional
court.e5Y
copy
to be. pla.ced in.to a. publil:' nview bID. "1.IOuld be \LE1duly
:tiurd:enaoDle for li t..l.gant II and thereby dimiDi.sh eccesii toO j pst-ice
tllLndl lofOuld impose siqJ1.ificant
wodrlQad burdll!!;nllfc~ I;:l)llrt51 to
ml!Lneqll!!. th,ill flew ~f pape~."
~~IJIPlJlnent.5 thi 5 blll
of
E:ei t~E.at-=. t.ha.t the pubUc:: b.aa eo
C'cnst.it.u'tLc:nM1ll [iqht
to acces:s court
r~conUl. re.qa-cdIC!:5::!1 hol.l
af
the COUEt muage!5i 't.a 5Jravlde such lI.ee~as
They point to Il
.:c:ecl!nt. c.ourt Calse tllat ]leld th4t: fI couJ:1;:.falliniii' [0 provide
ac:c::e.ss:1:.0 n....,l~rf11Bd. l::aso.-lnitiat1.nq
court .recaNI5 wali in
viDl;,."t,i..;anof th~ party's
COtl.stitD.t.ional eights,
IIlhich
C'cllli'titl.lta&i irupiJ-rable h.U1P. tCo\IIthous-e Ne'Ws Secvice \1'.
Jack.IJ.Qn tS'~ll_ Tail. 2010) 38 Hcdh. Lr ~ep_ 1'19./1.1
'The. Jackson
court
!:;Dt.Ued 4 pe.r:ma.nent injunc:t:ion
and firtill jud~ea t
"the

r

o
s:e 32:6

(Yea)

Pl!Igli:!:

of ~

"

provid.l.nog th-&t tt-.e H..ard.s ccunty Di.&trLct. Clerk's
Oftice Wif!6
enj(:lined frQm denyitlg' Coul'thouse thn·IBwith all pet.itions
allel
case-itLitiat.1n.g'
documl:ll"Ltiin civil r;:ilS'l!t5 fil.e.d and receivad l:Jy
th~ c:1erk';II- af.fLt;;e he:t....-een rridnigbt
;and the. tb.e.
the cle~k:' IS
office
close.
IS ~ 00 pLDI. CentrAl
StB.ndllord- 1::Lau:r Hon<iay thraLlgh
E"~idu.:'r'. except in the fc:lllQWirlq circum:stallCe.S:
whe.ce the filing
p.;l.rt'( i.:i seeking .:.m.eriency relief~
::!Iuc::h
&5 a temporary restrainln9
order.
til; daCUlaent h.as been
$EO'Jled or de.emed confidentieal.;
(:;!)
wh-er@.he cled:'.:s office
t
1& in ct"itical
stafli:n.g mode. or
completely closed tOi:: hll.5"illeXJi
due to incl~ent
....
eathe.J:'I
buildinq
e.,...u:::ll.at!onor othel: ~erq~nc.y;
('J)
where: a party has electronic;al1y
'filed a alse-init.iatlng
document
1ol'1tb:!L I:.hird~pi!l.rty provider
but the docm1I-eIIthas
nct hel£n recei vee. by tl1e clerk'lS: office;
I'll
,",here;:l, c:ase--inlthtin.gdcu:lmli!:ut h,as heen rajec:te.d
fo['
lack c f a filing
fee. and i.m&e.diatel.y retU-t'T'lerlto th~ fi Lin9

(ll

810

http://wwwJeginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12lhilVsen/sb

_0301-03 50/sb _326_ cfa _20110502_1428...

10/1312011

ER42

Document 22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 10 of 24p~Clg~lf3

#:446
party; Dnd
r51 ...meu otht:~ I:)iltt:aardinary cdr cumscaaces outside au!:
CQntml of the clerk· S Dffice ID.iI.ke curupLiel'QC'EI
Uterall",
illlPosd'ble.
iId. at pgs. 3-4.)
Ii'rDponent.s of this bill atque thl!llt the ptov1S1of,l of' tb1s bil~
that would provide same-day public eceees to court records is
.el.I'eady beIng fQl10wed :by a number of cou~ts.
U1d this bill.
which is coRS'istent witb wbat other
cQurts
auch as the J'l'O=:lOOn
cQurt u'e ~e.:tm1 ni.nq 80S con.atl. tutionalt
is ncCC!sury to ma.'ke
sure tihe public has aeeess to COIl:':t.re..;:or(f:o::n 311 .state cogrts_
i
In

te,

order

i'l,ddl['eS9 the

CODCeDlS that

tbe

"saae-day'"

l\I;QeSS

provitiiort

ot this
b1ll 1.111
Uflwcd:oI!IIble
and impractical..
the
may wish to eeesteee the fo1hlwir.g iLIIU!:udments.
wh1.ch
provide a more realistic:
:.pproaeli to providinq
sAlJIe-dAoy
a.:ces •.
Fu-rtlJe ~, a;fU:1: full i.JIIpl~tatioli
of the Ca1i£ozn!a
Cfl.se
MaPilClg'ement Sy"tem, the courta
5llould. be ahlE!: t.o p1:ovid.e tim£ly
public access tIC' case:-.-initiatirlg' civil
eed cri.Jqin.llli CDIl-~t
eeeeede
mDn. ea.s,i,ly ~nd quiC:llly.
~ttfHi!:

StlllVeGted .Aien.d.aL!::nt.$ :
L

On page -4 r strite. liMs 11 through
paqe (~ on line! 1'1 i.nlll!l"t:

2.

ze ,

On

68'1111. [i.'-l The Judicial C(lUncil~ in ccnsu.Luat.don ....
1tb
stak:ebol~eI'
~roup,~ shall
adapt.,
wLt.h'!n 18 lDonths of

IJ
5B 326 ({eel
r ... e '1 qo! "'!
q

enac:.on.eut af t.hi:s Ac:.t~ B rille or rilles '!iIf collrt to J:~ire
eoUJ:tl'i whir:b JUtve fully iJnpl~Tltl'!d
t~
C.a1iforn!;\ case:
Ha.nagoUlent Syst:em to pro'Q'ider to the: extent
possible
I'Ind
pr.~ic.able.
the public
with same-day accesS tD
ea.se-initiatiDg
clvll and cd_~d'l;'r,a~ ~1"Iu:ct t'~r:l"lrds.
J.

____

Li:pdted definition
cJ court .t'eco~d" 't(! be
a.vailable under- the- pro"i5ions
of tai 5i bill

lIIade

publid"

rh.15

bill vould requ.ire co.lJrts to make O1.5e-initiatinq
~".il
and
1;.-:-inrl..n1!l1 CQU[''[ ['1"![X]cd.!!: pubLicly
.... Cf!5s1bll!!
c
in
c1'tbe.r paper
or
ele.ctronic
fom.
EKe:~.pt
troll. the de..!inition
of f;:Bti .... LI1.U:.iati.nq
ciVU
.nd C'1m.iDlIl caurt J:1!.C:crd.!l .are dOCll:!llel'lt.l that are se.allCld
or proposed to be sealed by OOUEt Or4el':' ar lire eonfldl!rt.t1a.l by
operation
of l!:..l:iGtin-g lall.
Exil5ting
la..., pcoV'ides: tha.t.. doc.lnIeht.!l'
un.deE' l5eal Dol reqQ.estecl to b., undet seal H.r.Id
COLLctrecords
.RI.ade
con:fldential
by operation
D.f IHW l1I:e to be .,,-i thheld
f ["ora ,pl.Lblic:;
.acc:ull'.
(cal. Rule! bf C'OIl.t:t,rule. 2.550.)
ExlUllJ)les I;)f
confidefl.thl
.I;'~C<lrd5to which puhllit aecess i... restricted
by law
are records
at the f9Li!.y c:anci11D.tion court IFI'lm.. Cade: Sec:.
LelS (bl •• juve.n1.11!:court re:co['ds fW'el.t'. " Io:st. Code Sec. 821 j.
and seil""h. WiJ'rrJ.D.:I;.
.. .fl1davtt.s
lie,led
'Ilnde.c People v. Kobb.s
(19941 1 Col.lth 9.9.
lntEoduccci this bill did not provide. :rest..ric:t.iurlililfor lIIealed
and! eoraflda\1tial
doc:u.ents that are. wi thh.eld ft'QJ'I pubh_c aeee.cs
unde.t eKllStinq law.
The Los RIlgeles County Dilritr-.ict Attolney',!I
Off"lcc eKp:.:essed concern OYeI: this lack of .J"e&>t.iction.5, but
stated
it& support of the bi~l
long- a..t the bLll !oIiJ.S ~nded
to exeanpt 5ealed and confidenthl
coa.rt reeord .. frma the
provisloi1&at t.he.bill.
l'he Judic.iolLl Council
a151J exp~e..!I.:!iIll!:d
conc:eJ:.D ouer the unliILited
riqht
of public:
8.cl:!E!:5S to COllrt
records
ura.der tbe Int;roduc:ed b.ill.
Al.-tbou.qh tni.l'l b.lll has bean
amended to F,rovi~ pratoBc:t:ion$ undel: e:-.::1st:inq' ia.w for l5eeled and
eontidenthl
.re.cordli~ the Judicial
Council
rema~11..!t pposed tD
o
-r.hJ.s bill tlecau&~ the C(lurt clerur in addition
to the ath'!!:l'
eMi,u'tinq iotall:e p.roc:edl,.ll:e ~qui~~entfl,
WDuld have to det.e.r:m.il\.e
whe't.h.er the. document be11l9 filed
...... a. dooument falli;aq
s
undec
t.hl! definition. of II ~.!oe-iI:litiatia.g' d.oemdenr., I,.lll.lch wo~ld
fu.rtheE dow dO"m th.e lnta-ke prQcednrp:: and add i1ddit.ional
bur:dert.l'l to the: already
1lit:"t:ii!IIinedour't
c
Eiy.ste:D\.
As

f

.IF"

~!

;uuifele.s

ClLl1.t.ornia Newsp2!IIper Publ~5.t1l:.I;'i Assoc::iu.tion,
c;oun.ty D1.st..r-lct Attorney·./5i Off1~

I.Q.:.

o
sa 3'6 IYe.1
Page

8 of

'!

Qpp[]sition

~:
Ame~nt
~elBt~d

.Judicial

californians.
Coalit.ion

O:l'oWc::il a f ealifa:tUiIl

J\ .......re:

Pending I.-eqh I.atiot1

Ccurt.house

)lone

News Sf'.rvil:.::e, yt:t""sr.

Ktlcwn.

B 11

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pubIl1-12lbilllsenlsb_030

1-0350fsb_326 _cfa_20110502_1428

... 10/13/2011

ER43

s~

~i\~in8(Jftft-RnatN&N

Document 22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 11 of 24Pa~lP§J~~§l

#:447

Prior

Le.Qlslatioh

:

IfDn~

bO'tofD

http://wwwJeginfo_ca_gov/pubIl1-12lhilllsen/sb_0301-0350/sb_326

_cfa_2011 0502_1428_..

B 12

10/13/2011

ER44

Gme 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 12 of 24 Page 10

#:448

EXHIBIT C

ER45

Gme 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Filed 10/20/11 Page 13 of 24

Page 10

JJuOirial <TInuncilnf ClIalifnrnitt
ADMINISTRATIVE

OFFICE OF THE COURTS

OFFICE OF GOVERNM ENTAL AFFAlRS
770 LSrr"et,

SU([e

700 • Sacramento, Ufomia

95814-3393

Telephone [phone] lZl • Fax [phone]· roD 415-8654272
TANI

CANTIL-SAKAUYE

WILLIAM

Chief Jus~ice 0{ CaJifumia
ChaiT Df chdudi£i.u O;U)1£il

Atiminislmti1lf

C. VICKREY

Dn-ectof

RONALD 0

of 1M Coum

OVERHOLT

Chkf D$tI:)- DiTlxtOf

April 27, 2011

CURTIS

L. CHILD

llir,rrm-, Of]lCJ! /G",,"","'ent.ll Affair..
o

Hon. Noreen Evans, Chair
Senate Judiciary Committee
State Capitol, Room 4034
Sacramento, California 95814
Subject:
Hearing:

SB 326 (Yee), as amended April 25, 20] 1 ~ Oppose
Senate Judiciary Committee ~ May 3, 2011

Dear Senator Evans:

I regret to inform you that the Judicial Council continues to oppose SB 326 as amended April
25th, which would require the Judicial Council to adopt a rule of
case initiating documents
courthouse
court.

court requiring courts to make

in civil and criminal matters available for public inspection at the

no later than the end of the same day on which those records axe received by the

The council believes

that SB 326 would be completely unworkable

particularly given the judicial
access to court records.

branch's

The sponsors of SB 326 allege
"case-initiating
fundamentally

documents"

for the courts,

current fiscal situation, and would actually impede public

that courts are increasingly failing to provide same-day access to

and that the failure to provide such access is "contrary

public nature of adjudicative

court records."

to the

While the council strongly favors

timely public access to court records that are subject to public disclosure, SB 326 sets a standard
for access that cannot be achieved without a significant
Many courts make court records available within one
time is deemed insufficient

increase in court staffing.

court day of their filing, yet this turnaround

by the sponsors of SB 326. They assert that courts are performing

"an ever-growing list of additional

administrative

tasks that they have interposed

between the

C 13

ER46

()$iie 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 22-1
#:450

Hon, Noreen Evans
April 27, 2011
Page 2

Filed 10/20/11

Page 14 of 24

Page 10

filing of a document and its being made available to the public and the press." Yet the courts

note that one of those tasks may be the optical scanning of the document so that it can be made
available

to the public electronically

objective

and rernote1y in those cases in which remote access is

Providing remote electronic access to all on a next-day basis may better promote the

appropriate.

of public access and accountability

access to paper records at the courthouse
basis.

However,

use of electronic
outweighed

than reallocating resources to prioritize

the findings in SB 326 specifically
technologies.

same-day

on a daily
lament the delays that may result from the

to those few who can come to the courthouse

The council believes that any minor time delays are more than

by the substantial public benefit to the public of providing

electronic access to court

records.
Many courts are unable to meet the same day standard because they must complete basic case

tasks before they release the records to the public in order to ensure that they do not

processing

release confidential

information,

by the appropriate

that the filing is valid (e.g. it is accompanied

filing fee and is directed to the proper court), and to have sufficient information
court can protect the accuracy and integrity

of the record prior to its release.

such that the

These tasks are

its role as custodian of these records, and the speed with
which access is provided must be reasonably balanced with these responsibilities.
SB 326 has

important

functions of the court in

been amended

to expressly provide that confidential

records, courts must review the filings before providing them to the

protect confidential
requestor.

records need not be released, but in order to

On any given day the volume of filings may be such that courts cannot satisfy both

requirements

- if they perform the required

screening,

they will not be able to release records on

the day that they are received.
Sponsors have suggested that courts can simply collect newly filed records in a box while they
await processing
is not appropriate
sufficient

and provide access to those files on that basis. The courts, however,
to subject those records to unsupervised

information

note that

it

review before the court has entered

to protect the accuracy and integrity of the record. The only way for courts

to comply with this standard would appear to be to require that all parties submit two copies of
any document
for litigants

filed with the court. Yet, even tbis mandate, which would be unduly burdensome

and thereby diminish access to justice. would impose significant

workload

for courts to manage this flow of paper and sort those fi1ings that are confidential

burdens

from those that

are not.
It is also critical to note that many court filings are not readily available for public access on the
same day they are filed because the court needs to act upon them in a timely manner.
for temporary

restraining

orders for domestic

Requests

violence, elder abuse, and civil harassment

must be

acted upon by the court on the day that they are filed unless they are filed too late in the day for
the court to act upon them. Taking action on these matters before they become publicly
is an appropriate

course of action, and best serves the interest of the underlying

to provide immediate

protection

available

statutes that seek

to those who need it. Criminal filings for in-custody

defendants

C 14

ER47

Gme 2:11-cv-08083-R
Hon. Noreen Evans
Apri127, 2011
Page 3

-MAN

Document 22-1
#:451

Filed 10{20/11

Page 15 of 24

Page 10

must lead to a timely arraignment of those defendants, and the court needs the filing in order to
process the case and complete the arraignment. Courts need the flexibility to prioritize these
critical functions and to provide access to the records within a reasonable time frame.
Finally, SB 326 provides no relief to courts for records that are filed late in the day. Requiring a
court record filed minutes before the court closes to be available to the public that same day at
the courthouse is simply a logistical impossibility. As amended, SB 326 continues to include
these time sensitive filings, and fails to address how public access could be provided when the
filing occurs late in the day. WouLd courts be forced to reduce the hours in which filings are
accepted in order to create enough time to make new filings available before the courthouse
closes? SB 326, with its singular emphasis on same day access would force courts to consider
such illogical approaches.
The council is continuing to gather information on the costs to implement SB 326 on a statewide
basis, but would note that even as amended, SB 326 would require approximately 2.5 million
filings to be made available to the public on the day that they are filed. To complete the
necessary processing of these filings would impose tremendous burdens on court operations at a
time when courts are facing significant budget reductions. Many of our courts are seeing an
increase in filings at the same time that they are laying off staff and/or leaving many positions
vacant. Implementation ofSB 326 in that context would have very negative impacts on the
courts and require significant additional staff to accomplish its objectives without major
disruptions and delays in all other areas of court operations.
For these reasons, the Judicial Council opposes SB 326.

~)

Tracy Kenny
Attorney

TKfyt
cc: Members, Senate Judiciary Committee
Hon. Leland Vee, Member of the Senate
Ms. Tara Welch, Counsel, Senate Judiciary Committee
Mr. John O'Malley, Courthouse News Service
Mr. Aaron Maguire, Deputy Legislative Affairs Secretary, Office of the Governor
Ms. Kirsten Kolpitcke, Deputy Director of Legislation, Governor's Office of Planning and Research
Mr. Mike Petersen, Consultant, Senate Republican Office of Policy

C 15

ER48

~e

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 22-1
#:452

Filed 10/20/11

Page 16 of 24 Page 10

EXHIBITD

ER49

COOe

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

0

10/20/11

Filed

Page 17 of 24

Page 10

IDuOiciaI <ITnunriI rrf <TIalifnrnict
ADMINISTRATIVE

OFFlCE OF THE COURTS

OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL
770 LStreet, Suite 700 • Sacramento,
Telephone
TANI

916--323-3121'

AFFAIRS

Callfotnla

Fax916·323-4J47

9581<1·3393

• TDD 415-865-4172

CANTlL·SAKAUYE

c.

WILLlAM

auef }""tic£ of.CaIi/ornJa
Chair of Ute Jvdidal eo,.",il

VICKREY

Admi"'~"n.., Dim:t(>r of the Couru
RONALD

O. OVERHOLT

elli<f Deputy Dirececr
CURTIS

June 9,2011

L. CHILD

Drr""..".. Office of Goomtm£TItal Affairs

Han. Mike Feuer, Chair
Assembly

Judiciary Committee

State Capitol, Room 2013
Sacramento,
Subject:

California

95814

SB 326 (Yee), as amended. May 10, 2011-

Neutral

Dear Assembly Member Feuer:
The Judicial Council is pleased to inform you that it has removed its opposition to sa 326 and
adopted a neutral position on the bill as it was amended on May lOth. SB 326 requires the

Judicial Council, within 18 months of enactment of the legislation, to adopt a rule of court that
would

require courts that have fully implemented the Califomia Case Management System

(CCMS)

to provide, to the extent possible and practicable,

criminal

case initiating documents.

same day access to specified civil and

The council was opposed to prior versions of

because they would have required all courts, regardless

of their technology

sa 326

infrastructure,

to

make court filings available on the day that they were received by the court without exception.
A number of concerns with this approach

were raised which included:

(1) the scope of records to

be provided was overly broad and included high volume filings such as traffic tickets which are
of little public interest, (2) courts cannot make records available before they have received
preliminary

processing and given resource constraints

more than a

day, (3) some filings need to be acted upon by the court immediately and cannot be

made available until that action is complete,
exception

for documents

that are confidential

and current technology,

that may take

and (4) the introduced version of the bill made no
as a matter oflaw.

016

ER50

QJ!'$e2:11-cv-08083-R
Hon. Mike Feuer
June 9, 2011
Page 2

-MAN

Document 22-1
#:454

Filed 10/20/11

Page 18 of 24

Page ID

The May lOth version of SB 326 addresses each of these concerns. The scope of the records to
be made available has been limited and does not include limited civil or small claims filings or
any infractions, and it only encompasses "case initiating documents", thus excluding the many
other filings received by the court in these cases. The requirement that the mandate to make the
records available would only apply in those courts that have fully implemented CCMS will
address many of the case processing issues that were raised with the prior version. With
electronic filing, and an electronic document management system, CCMS will significantly
expedite the time it takes to make a record available to the public and reduce the workload
burden on the courts to accomplish initial case processing. Yet even with CCMS, it is clear that
there will be circumstances in which courts cannot meet a same day mandate, and the SB 326
amendments address this situation as well, by requiring such access only to the extent "possible
and practicable." Thus courts who are unable to meet this requirement because the court had to
act on the filing before it could be made public, or simply because the filing came too late in the
day to be made available on that same day, will not run afoul of the requirements to be
developed pursuant to this legislation.
TIle council recognizes the importance of timely public access to court records. The only issue
has been establishing reasonable parameters for providing such access. In its current form, SB
326 strikes a balance and will require timely public access without placing undue burdens on the
courts that must provide this access. As a result, it is no longer necessary for the council to
oppose SB 326, and we have adopted a neutral position on the May 1 amended version of the
bill.

o"

Attorney

cc: Members, Assembly Judiciary Committee
Hon, Leland Yee, Member of the Assembly
Ms. Leora Gershenzon, Counsel, Assembly Judiciary Committee
Mr. Aaron Maguire, Deputy Legislative Affairs Secretary, Office of the Governor
Ms. Kirsten Kolpitcke, Deputy Director of Legislation, Governor's Office of Planning and Research
Mr. Mark Redmond, Consultant, Assembly Republican Office of Policy

D17

ER 51

C§~ 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 22-1
#:455

Filed 10/20/11

Page 19 of 24 Page 10

EXHIBITE

ER52

SB 326 Senate Bill- History
CMe 2:11-cv-08083-R -MAN

Document 22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 1 of1
Page 20 of 24 Page 10

#:456
COMPLETE

BILL HISTORY

BILL NUMBER
: S.B. No. 326
AUTHOR
Yee
TOPIC
; Court records: public
TYPE

OF BILL

access.

:
Active
Non-Urgency
Non-Appropriations
Majority Vote Required
Non-State-Mandated
Local
Fiscal
Non-Tax Levy

Program

BILL HISTORY
2011
Sept. 1 From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and
amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
Aug. 25 Set, second hearing.
Placed on APPR. suspense file.
Held in
committee and under submission.
Aug. 22 From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and
amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
Aug. 17 Hearing postponed by committee.
July 6 Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
June 21 From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with
recommendation:
To consent calendar. (Ayes 10. Noes
0.) (June 211.
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
June 9 Referred to Com. on
JUD.
June 1 In Assembly.
Read first time.
Held at Desk.
May 31
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 39. Noes
O. Page 1184.) Ordered to
the Assembly.
May 24
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
May 23
From committee:
Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate
Rule 2B.8.
May 13
Set for hearing May
23.
May 10 Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
(Corrected May 11.)
May 9
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on
APPR.
(Ayes
5. Noes
O. Page 860.) (May 3).
Apr. 25 From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and
amended. Re-referred to Com. on
JUD.
Apr. 21 Set for hearing May
3.
Feb. 24 Referred to Com. on
JUD.
Feb. 15 From printer. May be acted upon on or after March
17.
Feb. 14 Introduced.
Read first time.
To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
To
print.

E 18

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bilVsen/sb_0301-0350/sb_326

_bill_ 2011090 l_hist...

10/13/2011

ER 53

QM.e 2: 11-cv-Oa083-R -MAN

Document

22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 21 of 24

Page 10

#:457

EXHIBITF

ER54

~e

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Filed 10/20/11

Docu

Page 22 of 24 Page 10

J!ubicial ([nuna! a£ OIalifornia:
ADMINlSTRATlVE
OFFLCE

OFFICE

OF THE COURTS

OF GOVERNMENTAL

770 LStrcet, Suite 700 • Sacramento.
Telephone 91MB-3lZl

AFFAIRS

Callfornia 958143393

• Fax9!6-323-4347

• IDO 415-665-4272

TANL CAN1LL.SAKAUYE

W[LLtAM

au.!"...a 0/ Califo-rnia
d
CIum nftk)uJJci..t

C. VICKREY

Admin"tmm.~ DiftclDr of the Couru

C""""f[
RONALD O. OVERHOLT

Chit./ Deputy Dir<e1Dr
CURTLS

August 8,2011

L. CHtLD

rn",=. Off""" DfG_,..""nta! Af/ain

Hon. Felipe Fuentes, Chair

Assembly Appropriations

Committee

State Capitol, Room 2114
Sacramento,
Subject:

Hearing:

California

95814

SB 326 (Yee), as proposed to be amended - Oppose/Fiscal
Committee - August 17, 2011

Impact Statement

Assembly Appropriations

Dear Assembly Member Fuentes:
The Judicial Council regrets to inform you that it has renewed
proposed

to be amended

because the requirement

on a same day basis would be completely

unworkable

of SB 326 from the Senate Judiciary Committee,
made the same

its opposition to SB 326 as it is

that courts make initial case filings available
for the courts. In order to secure passage

the author accepted amendments

to the bill that

day access rule contingent upon a court having fully implemented the California
System (CeMS). The amendments also provided these courts with the

Court Case Management
flexibility

to implement

those amendments,

critical, it is unreasonable
imposing

substantial

this requirement

the Senate Judiciary

"to the extent possible and practicable." In requesting
was clear that while timely public access is

Committee

to mandate immediate

access at the same time that the Legislature

cuts to the budgets of the trial courts.

would eliminate the provisions
day access requirement

relating to CCMS, and

The current amendments

is

to SB 326

only allow courts flexibility on the same

until the first hour of the next court day. Thus the amended version of

S8 326 would require courts, regardless of their technology infrastructure, to process and make
available to the public most new civil and criminal filings within the same day or the first hour of
the next day without exception.

Subsequent

to the Senate Judiciary Committee

ongoing cuts to the judicial branch in the budget were increased

hearing, the

by an additional $150 million.

F19

ER55

Filed 10/20/11

-MAN Document 22~ 1

<see 2: 11-cv-08083-R

Page 23 of 24 Page 10

#:459

Hon, Felipe Fuentes

August 8, 20 1I
Page 2

Most courts were not in a position to comply with the same day mandate in SB 326 before these

will not

additional cuts were enacted, but in the face of even deeper reductions, courts
sufficient staff available

to fulfill the requirements

Many courts are unable to meet the same day standard

because they must complete basic case

tasks before they release the records to the public in order to ensure

processing

release confidential

court can protect the accuracy and integrity of the record prior to its release.
important functions of the court in its role as custodian
which access is provided

must be reasonably

such that the

These tasks are

of these records, and the speed with

balanced

to expressly provide that confidential

to protect confidential
requestor.

that they do not

that the filing is valid (e.g., it is accompanied by the appropriate

information,

filing fee and is directed to the proper court), and to have sufficient information

being proposed

have

of SB 326.

with these responsibilities.

SB 326 is

records need not be released, but in order

records, courts must review the filings before providing them to the

On any given day the volume of filings may be such that courts cannot satisfy both

requirements

- if they perform the required screening,

the day that they are received.

they will not be able to release records on

While the amendments

would allow the court one additional hour

to complete these tasks on the following day, that level of flexibility is not sufficient given the
resource shortages that courts currently face. In order to comply. courts would need to hire
significantly

more staff at a substantial cost.

The council recognizes
has been establishing
struck a reasonable

the importance
reasonable

of timely public access to court records.

parameters

for providing

such access.

The only issue

In its prior form, SB 326

balance that would have required timely public access without placing undue

burdens on the courts that must provide this access.
balance and make SB 326 unworkable

The proposed amendments

eliminate that

and very costly for the courts.

Fiscal Impact
In light of the 5)350 million budget cut tothe judicial
corresponding

reductions

imposed in the last several years, the additional tasks imposed by

this measure on the trial courts cannot realistically
in burgeoning

and the

in court staff and operating hours necessitated by that budget cut as

well as the budget reductions
existing court resources

branch for FY 2011-2012,

be accomplished

from other current constitutional

delays in processing

While the number of additional

of civil and criminal

without: (1) diverting

and statutory responsibilities

(resulting

cases), or (2) additional court staff.

court staff needed to comply with the requirements

of SB 326

will vary from court to court, we estimate that the cost for additional court staff on a statewide
basis would be between

$5 - 10 million, annually.

mitigated to the extent that an improved

The additional ongoing costs may be

court case management

system is imp1emented in

certain trial courts in future years.

F20

ER56

c~

2:11-cv-08083-R

Hon, Felipe Fuentes
August 8, 2011

-MAN

Document 22-1

Filed 10/20/11

Page 24 of 24

Page ID

#:460

Page 3

Please contact Tracy Kenny or me at 916-323-3121, or at [e-mail], or
[e-mail] if you would like further information or have any questions about the
impact of this legislation on the judicial branch.
Sincerely,

cc: Members, As embly Appropriations Committee
Hon. Leland Vee, Member of the Senate
Ms. Susan Chan, Office of Senator Leland Vee
Mr. Chuck Nicol, Principal Consultant, Assembly Appropriations Committee
Mr. Allan Cooper, Fiscal Consultant, Assembly Republican Fiscal Office
Mr. Michael Miyao, Budget Analyst, Department of Finance

F 21

ER57

C1::ile2:11-cv-08083-R

o%oYJft]

1

16:10:27

-MAN

Document 3

FAX [phone]

Filed 09/29/11

Page 1 of 2 Page 10 #:336

NJ\1'IONWIDE LeGJ\L
1

COpy
Rachol Matteo-Boehm (SBN 195492)
2

fIlchcJ,mattel)[e-mail]

David Greene (SBN 160101)
3 [e-mail]
4 L~ila C. Knox (SBN 245999)
[e-mail]
5 HOLME ROBERTS &. OWEN LLP
6 560 Mission Street. Suite 250
7 San Francisc01 CA 94105-2994
Telephone: [phone]
8 Facsimile: [phone]

...

'1'1',,-

I"

~·r~·

;.:=.:::

..

~

-1;.1

~
-

:.., ......
t

u

zt-r-(
;-0:,
-t

r.

:. ::
..

r--~-

:;;;::
. ~.
....

N
I,Q

::=..
-,~

..

Ul
Ul

Attorneys for Plaintiff
10 COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE
9

1t

UN1TBD STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALlFORNlA

12
13

14

Courthouse News Service.

15
16
17
18
19
20

.

r C

3 \2;C~~

NOTICE OF MOTION AND
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION

Plaintiff,

v.
Michael D. Planet, in his offielal capacity
as Court Executive Officer/Clerk of the
Ventura County Superior Court.

Date:
Nov. 7, 201 J
Time:
10:00 am
Courtroom:
Judge:

Defendants.

21

Docu£.Renfs filed herewith;

22

1) Me'morandum of Points and
Authorities
2) Declaration of WiUiam Girdner
3) Declaration of Christopher Marshall
4) DecJaration of Julianna Krolak
5) Declaration of Karen Covel

23

24
25
26

t!lr:o.O808

I----------------

J

27

28

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
!r~~6612 vi· NaU.., orMDIioo ""d MotiOli rOI PI

ER58

~e

2: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 3

Filed 09/29/11

Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:337

TO THE COURT, THE PARTIES AND ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD:

1
2

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on November 7,2011, at 10:00 a.m., in

3

Courtroom

4

California,

5

Plaintiff Courthouse News Service will and does move this court for a preliminary

6

injunction against Defendant Michael Planet, in his official capacity as Court

7

Executive Officer/Clerk of the Ventura County Superior Court, together with his

8

agents, assistants, successors, employees, and all persons acting in concert or

9

cooperation with them, or at his direction or under his control, prohibiting him

of the United States District Court for the Central District of

--------~-

Division, at

-~----------------------------

10

preliminarily,

during the pendency of this action, from enforcing his policy of denying

11

Courthouse News Service access to new unlimited jurisdiction civil complaints filed

12

at the Ventura County Superior Court until after the "requisite processing" has been

13

completed, and further directed to provide Courthouse News Service with access to

14

new complaints no later than the end of the day on which they are filed, except in

15

those instances where the filing party is seeking a TRO or other immediate relief or

16

has properly filed the pleading under seal.
The motion is based on the complaint, the memorandum of points and

17
18

authorities, the declarations of William Girdner, Christopher Marshall, Julianna

19

Krolak, and Karen Covel, each filed herewith, any opposition papers and evidence

20

filed by Defendant, Plaintiffs

21

argument or evidence presented at hearing, or as otherwise permitted by the Court.

22

Date: September 29, 2011

23

reply papers and evidence submitted therewith, and any

HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP
RACHEL MATTEO-BOEHM
DAVID GREENE
LEIL
NOX

24

25

26
a

27

Attorneys for Plaintiff
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE

28

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
#

ER59

1

COPY.
Rachel MatteowBoehm (S8N 195492)
rachel.matteo-boehm@hro,com
David Greene (SBN 1(0107)
3 [e-mail]
4 Leila C. Knox (SBN 245999)
2

[e-mail]
S HOLME ROBERTS & OWBN LLP
ti 560 Mission Street~Suite 2S0
San Prancisco, CA 94 10.5..2994
7 Tolaphone: (4J5) 268=2000
8 Facsimile: (415) 268 ..1999

&EP 292811

9 Attorneys for Plaintiff
10 COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE
lJ

UNITED STA TBS DISTRICT COURT·
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12
13
14

CAs~.11q 08 083~

Courthouse News Service,

JS

17

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF

Plaintiff,

]6

v.

18 Michael Planet, in his official capacity as
19 Court Executive Officer/Clerk of the
Ventura County Superior Court.

20

Defendant.

21

22
23

24

Plaintiff Courthouse News Service C'Courthouse News"), by and through its
undersigned attorneys, hereby alleges the following facts in support of its Complaint
for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief

25
JURISDICTION
26

L

AND VENUE

Courthouse News' claims arise under the First and Fourteenth

27

Amendments to the United States Constitution, the federal common law and the Civil

28

Rights Act, Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction
I
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
R12611 vl .. r

ER60

Filed 09/29/11

~~se 2:11-cv-08083-R -MAN Document 1

Page 2 of 62 Page ID #:5

1

under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (federal question), 1343 (civil rights), and 2201 (declaratory

2

relief). This Court has supplemental jurisdiction

3

state law claims brought pursuant to California Rule of Court 2.550. Defendant is

4

subject to personal jurisdiction

5

commenced.

2.

6

under 28 U.S.C. § 1361 over the

in this judicial district at the time this action is

Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)

7

because, on information and belief, Defendant resides in California, and in this

8

district, and because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to

9

Courthouse News' claims occurred in this district.

10

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
3.

11

Plaintiff Courthouse News Service brings this action seeking injunctive

12

and declaratory relief against Defendant Michael Planet, in his official capacity as

13

Court Executive Officer/Clerk

14

of Ventura ("Ventura Superior"), to restrain the deprivation under color of state law of

15

Courthouse News' rights, privileges and immunities under 42 V.S.c.

16

the United States Constitution,

17

Court.

4.

18

of the Superior Court of the State of California, County

§ 1983 et seq.,

federal common law, and the California Rules of

Courthouse News, a widely-read legal news wire service with thousands

19

of subscribers across the nation, seeks timely access to new civil unlimited jurisdiction

20

complaints filed with Ventura Superior. In recognition of the crucial role played by

21

the media to inform interested persons about new court cases, it has been a

22

longstanding tradition for both state and federal courts to provide reporters who visit

23

the court every day with access to new complaints at the end of the day on which they

24

are filed. This same-day access ensures that interested members of the public learn

25

about new civil litigation while the initiation of that litigation is still newsworthy.

26

5.

In contrast, at Ventura Superior, same-day access is a rarity and delays in

27

access are rampant.

During a four-week period between August 8 and September 2,

28

2011, Courthouse News was given same-day access to only small minority of new
2
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
#726ISvlsar

ER61

~~e

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 3 of 62 Page 10 #:6

1

civil unlimited complaints, with the vast majority of complaints delayed for days or

2

even weeks.

6.

3

By denying Courthouse News timely access to newly-filed civil

4

unlimited jurisdiction complaints, these records are as good as sealed for an

5

appreciable

amount of time after filing, in violation of the rights secured to

6

Courthouse

News by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Ll.S, Constitution,

7

federal common law, and the California Rules of Court. Having failed in its efforts to

8

work cooperatively with Defendant to reach an amicable resolution to these delays,

9

Courthouse

10

News thus brings this action challenging the legality of Defendant's

actions and seeking injunctive and declaratory relief.

11
12

PAJtTIES
7.

Courthouse News Service is a California corporation with its principal

13

place of business located in Pasadena, California.

14

news wire services, such as the Associated Press, except that Courthouse News

15

specializes

16

appellate level. Courthouse News' comprehensive

17

litigation through its print, web site, and e-mailed publications has made it a go-to

18

source ofinfonnation

19

approximately

20

many more readers of its freely available web site, www.courthousenews.com,

21

8.

Courthouse News is similar to other

in news reporting about civil lawsuits, from the date of filing through the
and timely coverage of civil

about the nation's civil courts. Courthouse News has

3,000 institutional and individual subscribers across the nation, and

Defendant Michael Planet is the Court Executive Officer/Clerk of the

22

Superior Court of the State of California, County of Ventura ("Ventura Superior"),

23

and is sued in that official capacity.

24

for, among other things, the administration

25

capacity, Defendant, as well as those acting under his direction and supervision, is

26

directly involved with and/or responsible for the delays in access to newly-filed

27

complaints

28

the clerk's office as a whole. Defendant's

The Court Executive Officer/Clerk is responsible
of court records. Acting in his official

experienced by Courthouse News, which acts reflect the official policy of
actions, as alleged in this Complaint, are
3

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARA WRY RELIEF
1172618 vt sar

ER62

e 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 4 of 62 Page 10 #:7

1

under the color of California law and constitute state action within the meaning of the

2

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On

3

information and belief, Defendant resides in Ventura County, California and his

4

primary place of employment is located in Ventura County, California.
9.

5

Defendant is sued in his official capacity only. Courthouse News seeks

6

relief against Defendant as well as his agents, assistants, successors. employees, and

7

all persons acting in concert or cooperation with him or at his direction or under his

8

control.
FACTUAL

9

10

A.

A Tradition

10.

11

Of Same-Day

ALLEGATIONS

Access To New Civil Complaints

In recognition of the crucial role played by the media

to

inform interested

12

persons about new court cases, it has been a longstanding tradition for courts to

13

provide reporters who visit the court every day with access to that day's new civil

14

complaints at the end of the day on which they are filed. This same-day access

15

ensures that interested members of the public learn about new cases while they are

16

still newsworthy.

17

in many instances before the complaints have been fully processed.

18

11.

Courts have traditionally and still do provide this same-day access,

For example, at the Los Angeles Division of the United States District

19

Court for the Central District of Cali fomi a, a room is set up directly off the docketing

20

department with a set of pass-through boxes. At the end of each day, a staffer places

21

all of the civil complaints filed that day in the pass-through boxes so the media can

22

review them. These complaints are made available for review before they have been

23

processed.

24

room where they review the complaints and then put them back in the pass-through

25

boxes. At the San Francisco Division of the U.S. District Court for the Northern

26

District of California, reporters go behind the counter and review new complaints filed

27

that same day, before they have been fully processed or posted on PACER. They are

28

also permitted access to the "transfer boxes" of new actions being sent to different

Reporters that cover the courthouse on a daily basis have a key to the

4
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
1171618 vi saf

ER63

~se 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Filed 09/29/11

Document 1

Page 5 of 62 Page 10 #:8

I

divisions ofthe court, and are provided with a copy of the intake log. Same-day

2

access to new civil complaints is also provided at the Southern and Eastern Districts of

3

California.

4

12.

Similarly, at many of the state superior courts in California, reporters are

5

provided with same-day access to new civil complaints, a practice that is consistent

6

with other major state trial courts across the country. For example, at the San

7

Francisco, Los Angeles, and Santa Clara County superior courts, new filings are

8

available to news reporters after initial intake tasks, but well before full processing.

9

The Superior Courts in Alameda, Contra Costa, and Riverside counties also provide

10

same day access to the press, and while it is Courthouse News' understanding that

1I

such access is provided after a certain amount of additional processing has been

12

completed,

13

13.

access is nevertheless provided on a same-day basis.
Courthouse News' experience at the Eighth Judicial District Court in Las

14

Vegas, Nevada, demonstrates that same-day access to new complaints can be provided

15

in both the traditional paper and e-filing enviromnents.

16

to mandatory

17

reporter with paper-filed complaints filed earlier that day, regardless of whether they

18

had been fully processed.

19

e-filing of complaints, the court began requiring news reporters to review new

20

complaints at a computer terminal in the clerk's office, but this system resulted in

21

complaints not being available for viewing until the day after they were filed. The

22

reason for these delays was that new complaints did not appear on the computer

23

terminals until after they had been "accepted" by the clerk's office, and only after the

24

terminals had been updated to reflect the new filings. After Courthouse News brought

25

these delays to the attention of the court, the court adopted a new system: an electronic

26

in-box (or, more precisely, a feature called "Daily Documents") through which

27

reporters essentially see exactly what staffers in the clerk's office see as new

28

complaints flow in throughout the day. Complaints can be viewed on a computer

Prior to that court's transition

e-filing in February 2010, court officials provided Courthouse News'

Following the switch to mandatory e-filing, which included

5
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
ri72618 vi saf

ER64

65Se 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29/11 Page 6of62

Page 10 #:9

terminal as soon as they cross the electronic equivalent of the intake counter at the
2

clerk's office, even if court staffhas not yet had a chance to review the complaint,

3

process it, and/or manually upload it for electronic viewing. Thus,

4

traditional paper and new e-filing environments, the Eighth Judicial District Court has

5

provided Courthouse News' reporter with same-day access to new civil complaints

6

whether or not those complaints have been fully processed.
14.

7

in both the

Through its experience covering civil litigation during the past twenty-

8

one years, Courthouse News has developed extensive personal knowledge of the

9

procedures that courts throughout the country currently use, and have used in the past,

10

to provide press access to new civil complaints. Attached as Exhibit 1 is a true and

11

correct copy of a summary of media access procedures used in state and federal courts

12

across the nation, which was prepared by Courthouse News Service (the "Access

13

Summary"). As demonstrated in the Access Summary, to make sure that new

14

complaints are accounted for, clerk's offices often couple same-day access procedures

15

with security procedures such as requiring reporters to provide collateral such as a

16

driver's license, instituting a check-out procedure, or setting aside a secure area for the

17

media to review the newly filed complaints.

18

B.

News Reporting Activities of Courthouse News
15.

19

Courthouse News' core news publications are its new litigation reports,

20

which are e-mailed to its subscribers and contain staff-written summaries of all

21

significant new civil complaints filed in a particular court. Decisions as to which new

22

civil complaints will receive coverage are made by the reporters after reviewing all of

23

the new filings. Although not all complaints are significant enough to merit coverage,

24

these reports provide coverage of many more civil actions than is typically found in a

25

daily newspaper. For larger courts, reports are e-mailed to subscribers each evening

26

and provide coverage of new complaints filed earlier that same day.

27

28

16.

In all, Courthouse News publishes sixteen new litigation reports for its

California subscribers, which include daily coverage of new litigation filed in all four
6

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
1171618vl sa!

ER65

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 7of62

Page 10 #:10

I

federal district courts as well as the California Superior Courts for the counties of

2

Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Kern, Los Angeles (downtown and Santa Monica

3

courthouses), Orange, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San

4

Francisco, San Joaquin, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma,

5

Stanislaus, and Ventura. Courthouse News covers Ventura Superior as part of its

6

Central Coast Report.

7

about new civil filings, which are delivered bye-mail.

8

sign up to receive an alert anytime a particular company is sued.

9

17.

In addition, Courthouse News offers its subscribers alerts
For example, a subscriber can

Nationwide, there are nearly 3,000 subscribers to Courthouse News' new

10

litigation reports, with approximately

11

subscribers include lawyers and law firms, well-known media outlets such as the Los

12

Angeles Times, the Los Angeles Business Journal, the Pacific Coast Business Times,

13

the San Jose Mercury News, Forbes, and the Boston Globe, as well as several

14

universities and law libraries.

18.

15

740 in California alone. Courthouse News'

To produce this level of coverage, Courthouse News employs a

16

nationwide network of more than one hundred reporters who are assigned to cover one

17

or more individual courts. At most of the Jarger courts, Courthouse News' reporters

18

visit their assigned court near the end of each court day. The reporter reviews civil

19

complaints filed earlier that day and prepares an original summary of each complaint

20

or other case-initiating document that is oflikely interest to Courthouse News'

21

subscribers for inclusion in the report. In California, Courthouse News only reviews

22

"unlimited jurisdiction" civil complaints - that is, complaints where the amount in

23

controversy usually exceeds $25,000. Given the nature of this publication, any delay

24

in the reporter's ability to review a newly filed complaint necessarily creates a delay

25

in Courthouse News' ability to inform interested persons of the factual and legal

26

allegations in those complaints, and is especially problematic when there is an

27

intervening weekend andlor holiday, in which case a delay of even one court day

28

results in actual delays of three or even four calendar days.
7
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
#12618

v I s.r

ER66

e 2:11-cv-08083-R

19.

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 8 of 62 Page 10 #: 11

In addition to its new litigation reports and alerts, Courthouse News

2

publishes a web site, www.courthousenews.com,

3

commentary about civil cases and appeals, and is updated throughout the day.

4

Readership of the web site has grown steadily.

5

web site was receiving an average of300.000

6

readership has spiked almost threefold.

7

visitors; in August 2011, it had 800,000 unique visitors; and as of the date of this

8

filing, the site had 1.14 million unique visitors for September 2011. Reports from

9

www.courthousenews.com

10

which features news reports and

Just two years ago, in mid-2009, the
unique visitors each month. Since then,

In July 2011, the site had 938,000 unique

are frequently picked up by other news outlets and other

Internet content providers, and as a result, disseminated to a much broader audience.
20.

]1

Rounding out its coverage of civil litigation, Courthouse News also

12

offers four print publications. These include the Four District Almanac (which

13

includes reports on all four of Cali fomi a's federal district courts), the Entertainment

14

Law Digest; the Environmental Law Report, and the Securities Law Report.

15

C.

16

Delays In Access At The Ventura County Superior Court
21.

Courthouse News began covering new civil case filings at Ventura

17

Superior on a regular basis in 2001. As is the case with other California superior

18

courts it covers, Courthouse News currently visits Ventura Superior toward the end of

19

each court day and only reviews unlimited jurisdiction complaints.

20

News' estimation, an average of 15 new unlimited jurisdiction

21

filed each day. Since 2001, Courthouse News' Ventura Superior reporter has been

22

Julianna Krolak.

23

22.

In Courthouse

civil complaints are

Initially, Ms. Krolak: visited Ventura Superior only once and later twice

24

each week. During this time, and continuing through the present, the clerk's office

25

has maintained a "media bin" which contained the new civil complaints that clerk's

26

office staff anticipated would be of likely press interest. Other filings had to be

27

specifically requested from the clerk's office staff. Initially, and up until a few years

28

ago, Courthouse News' reporter did this by requesting a range of sequentially
8
COMPLAINT FOR fNJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
tl7261SvI •• r

ER6?

e 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 9 of 62 Page ID #:12

1

numbered case files. Through these procedures, Ms. Krolak.was able to see the large

2

majority of the new civil unlimited complaints filed since her prior visit.

3

23.

Beginning in early 2008, however, the clerk's office made a series of

4

small and large changes that made Courthouse News' review of new civil complaints

5

less timely and more difficult. Most notably, March 2009, the clerk's office instituted

6

a new rule that limited Ms. Krolak to viewing only twenty-five complaints per day,

7

which meant that Courthouse News could no longer request to see a sequential range

8

of cases but was instead compelled to request individual complaints based on docket

9

information. Not only was this more cumbersome for both Courthouse News and

10

clerk's office staff alike, but not all of the complaints Ms. Krolak requested to see

11

were always made available for review. And even if the complaints were not

12

available for review, they still counted toward her per-day limit. The result was

13

delayed and incomplete access to new civil complaints.

14

24.

As is its normal practice, Courthouse News brought these problems to the

15

attention of Defendant and his staff in an attempt to work them out cooperatively.

16

Through correspondence, discussions, and an in-person meeting, an arrangement was

17

worked out in June 2009 by which newly filed complaints were to be made available

18

to Courthouse News' reporter after some processing but before the complaints had

L9

been fully processed, the result of which was that access became much more timely.

20

Unfortunately, staffers in the clerk's office soon began waiting until new complaints

21

had been fully processed before providing them to the press, the result of which was

22

delays in access.

23

25.

In an effort to improve the quality of the Central Coast Report through

24

more timely reporting on new civil unlimited jurisdiction complaints, in November

25

2010, Courthouse News began covering Ventura Superior a daily basis. Prompted by

26

its change to daily coverage and the access problems it continued to experience,

27

Courthouse News once again initiated discussions with the clerk's office about the

28

possibility of adjusting its procedures so that Ms. Krolak could have same-day access
9
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
If726IB vl saf

ER68

@2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 10 of62

Page 10 #:13

1

to newly filed unlimited jurisdiction civil complaints, as news reporters do in other

2

courts they visit on a daily basis.

3

26.

Unfortunately, these discussions

did not lead to any improvements in

4

access, and the delays got even worse.

5

News' cOWlSelwrote to Defendant to request that Courthouse News' reporter be given

6

timely access to new unlimited civil filings and suggesting possible ways in which this

7

could be accomplished.

8
9

27.

Accordingly, on June 20,2011,

Courthouse

A true and correct copy of that letter is attached as Exhibit 2.

By letter dated July 11,2011, Defendant replied that his office "cannot

make any new filings available until the requisite processing is completed."

10

Defendant further stated that "While I appreciate the Courthouse News Services'

11

interest in same-day access, the Court cannot prioritize that access above other

12

priorities and mandates."

13

is attached as Exhibit 3.

28.

14

A true and correct copy of Defendant's

July 11,2011, letter

Courthouse News' counsel responded by letter dated August 2, 2011,

15

disputing Defendant's

16

"processing"

17

same-day access. A true and correct copy of that letter is attached as Exhibit 4.

18

Courthouse

29.

19

assertion that access could not be provided until after

and again providing examples of how other courts were able to provide

News has received no response to that letter.

From August 8, 20Il, through September 2,2011, Ms. Krolak tracked

20

the availability of newly filed complaints at the Ventura courthouse.

During that

21

period, she reviewed 152 new unlimited civil complaints, on average fewer than 8

22

complaints

23

being reviewed, the delays were significant

24

between the date of filing and the date that Courthouse News' reporter was first

25

allowed to see the complaint:

per court day. Yet even with that relatively small number of complaints
The following charts reflect the delays

26
27
28
10
COMPLA£NT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
#12618"

saf

ER69

nP 2: 11-cv-08083-R

1
2
3
4
5

6
7
8
9
10
11
12

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

COMPLAINTS REVIEWED
Del~s Reported in Calendar Days
Case availabili!y
Number of cases
Same-day
Next-day
2-6 days
7-14 days
15-34 days

Page 10 #:14

Percentage
6%
14%
62%
15%
3%

9
21
94
23
5

COMPLAINTS REVIEWED
Delays Reported in Court Days
Case availa hility
Num ber of cases
Same-day
Next-day
2-6 days
7-14 days
15-24 days

Page 11 of 62

9
28

Percentage
6%
18%
66%
8%
2%

100
12

3

13
14

15
16

17
18
19

CO~LAmITSREPORTED
Delays Reported in Calendar Days
Number of cases
Case availability

4%
14%
60%
17%
5%

4
14
60
17
5

Same-day
Next-day
2-6 days
7-14 days
15-34 days

Percentage

20
21

22
23
24
25
26

27

28

COMPL~SREPORTED
Delays Reported in Court Days
Number of cases
Case availability
4
18
66
9

Same-day
Next-day
2-6 days
7-14 days
15-24 days
30.

Percentage
4%
18%
66%
9%
3%

3

As reflected in the above charts, 94 percent of new complaints were not

available on the day they were filed, with delays stretching up to 34 calendar days.
II

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
((72618 vl .ar

ER 70

~e 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 12 of 62 Page 10 #:15

1

COUNT ONE

2

Violation of U.S. Const. Amend. I and 42 U.S.C. 1983

3

31.

Courthouse News incorporates the allegations of Paragraphs 1-30 herein.

4

32.

Defendant's actions under color of state law, including without limitation

5

his policies that have led to delays in access to new civil unlimited complaints and his

6

denial of timely, same-day access to new civil unlimited complaints, deprive

7

Courthouse News, and by extension its subscribers, of their right of access to public

8

court records secured by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
33.

9

The First Amendment requires that for anything more than a de minimis

10

denial of access to a court record, that there be an adversarial adjudicative process that

11

considers the propriety of the effective sealing of the record on a case-by-case basis.

12

Neither Defendant nor anyone at the clerk's office has the authority or ability to

13

conduct that process. Such authority lies only in ajudge of the court. Defendant's

14

exercise of unguided discretion to effectively seal a court record without providing

15

any of the procedural or substantive protections required by the First Amendment

16

denies Courthouse News and the public of their constitutional rights of access to new

17

civil complaints.

18

34.

Moreover, except as deemed permissible following the appropriate case-

19

by-case adjudication, there is no compelling or overriding interest sufficient to

20

overcome Courthouse News' presumptive right of access to new complaints under the

21

First Amendment. And even if an overriding or compelling interest did exist, there

22

are far less restrictive means of achieving any such interest, and Defendant's policies

23

are not narrowly tailored to serve that interest.
35.

24

Courthouse News has no adequate and speedy remedy at law to prevent

25

or redress Defendant's unconstitutional actions, and will suffer irreparable harm as a

26

result of Defendant's violation ofits First Amendment rights. Courthouse News is

27

therefore entitled to declaratory and both preliminary and permanent injunctive relief

28

to prevent further deprivation ofthe First Amendment rights guaranteed to it and its
12

COMPLAlNT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
B72618v1

saf

ER 71

e 2:11-cv-08083-R

1

-MAN

Document 1

Page 13 of 62 Page 10 #:16

Filed 09/29/11

subscribers.

COUNT TWO

2

Violation of Federal

3

Common Law and 42 U.S.C. § 1983

4

36.

Courthouse News incorporates the allegations of Paragraphs 1-35 herein.

5

37.

Defendant's actions under color of state law, including without limitation

6

his policies that have led to delays in access to new civil unlimited complaints and his

7

denial of timely, same-day access to new civil unlimited complaints. deprive

8

Courthouse

9

guaranteed by the federal common law.
38.

10

News and its subscribers of the presumption

of access to court records

There is no legitimate justification for a blanket rule for withholding all

11

new complaints that is sufficient to overcome the common law right of Courthouse

12

News and its subscribers to be able to timely review new case-initiating documents.

13

39.

Courthouse News has no adequate and speedy remedy at law to prevent

14

or redress Defendant's

actions, and will suffer irreparable harm as a result of

15

Defendants'

16

prolonged

17

to its subscribers, but are also likely to result in a loss of subscribers or, at the very

18

least, a perception among subscribers that Courthouse News's news reporting

19

products are less useful and valuable than they have been in the past. leading to a loss

20

of goodwill.

21

preliminary

22

guaranteed

violation of its common law right of access. This is so, in part, because
delays in access not only diminish the value of Courthouse News's reports

Courthouse News is therefore entitled to declaratory and both
and permanent

injunctive relief to prevent further deprivation of the rights

to it and its subscribers under the common law.
COUNT THREE

23

Violation of California Rule of Court 2.550

24

25

40.

Courthouse News incorporates the allegations of Paragraphs 1-39 herein.

26

41.

Defendant's

actions under color of state law, including without limitation

27

his policies that have led to delays in access to new civil unlimited complaints and his

28

denial of timely, same-day access to new civil unlimited complaints. effectively seals
IJ

COMPLAfNT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
Y72618vl saf

ER 72

~

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09129/11

Page 14 of62

Page 10 #:17

1

those records until the Ventura Superior Court, in its unguided discretion, determines

2

that the complaints may be made public.

3

Court 2.550, which requires that a court make specific, written fmdings before sealing

4

a record.
42.

5

Such action violates California Rule of

Even if Defendant had endeavored to comply with Rule of Court 2.550,

6

he would not have been able to make the required showing that: (1) There exists an

7

overriding interest that overcomes the right ofpuhlic access to the record; (2) The

8

overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3) A substantial probability exists that

9

the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed; (4) The proposed

10

sealing is narrowly tailored; and (5) No less restrictive means exist to achieve the

11

overriding interest.

12

43.

Courthouse News has no adequate and speedy remedy at law to prevent
actions, and will suffer irreparable harm as a result of

13

or redress Defendant's

14

Defendant's

15

prolonged delays in access not onI y diminish the value of Courthouse News' reports

16

to its subscribers, but are also likely to result in a loss of subscribers or, at the very

17

least, a perception among subscribers that Courthouse News' news reporting products

18

are less useful and valuable than they have been in the past, leading to a loss of

19

goodwill.

20

and permanent injunctive relief to prevent further deprivation of the rights guaranteed

21

to it and its subscribers under Rule of Court 2.550.

violation of Cali fomi a Rule of Court 2.550. This is so, in part, because

Courthouse News is therefore entitled to declaratory and both preliminary

PRA YER FOR RELIEF

22
23

WHEREFORE,

Plaintiff Courthouse News Service prays for judgment against

24

Defendant Michael Planet, in his official capacity is the Court Executive Officer/Clerk

25

of the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Ventura ("Ventura

26

Superior"), as follows:

27
28

1.

For preliminary and permanent injunctions against Defendant, including

his agents, assistants, successors, employees, and all persons acting in concert or
14
COMPLAINT FOR INITlNCTIVE

AND DEC LARA TORY RELIEF
#72618 vi saf

ER 73

tf-if

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 15 of 62 Page 10 #:18

1

cooperation with him, or at his direction or under his control, prohibiting him

2

preliminarily,

3

continuing his policies resulting in delayed access to new unlimited jurisdiction civil

4

complaints and denying Courthouse News timely access to new civil unlimited

5

jurisdiction

6

following the appropriate case-by-case adjudication.
2.

7

during the pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from

complaints on the same day they are filed, except as deemed permissible

For a declaratory judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 declaring

8

Defendant's

policies that knowingly affect delays in access and a denial of timely,

9

same-day access to new civil unlimited complaints as unconstitutional

under the First

10

and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and in violation of the

11

federal common law and California Rule of Court 2.550, for the reason that that it

12

constitutes an effective denial of access to court records.

13
14
15

3.

For an award of costs and reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant to 42

U.S.c. § 1988; and
4.

For all other relief the Court deems just and proper.

16

17

HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP
RACHEL MATTEO-BOEHM

Date: September 29, 2011

18

DAVID GREENE

19

LEILA KNOX

BY:1~Zt1~

20
21

22

Attorneys for Plaintiff

23

COURTHOUSE

NEWS SERVICE

24
25
26
27
28
15

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
N12618vl saC

ER 74

C<m 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29111

Page 16 of 62 Page 10 #:19

EXHIBIT!

ER75

~2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 17 of 62 Page ID #:20

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
Prepared By Courthouse News Service
September 2011
Courts around the country have developed a variety of procedures to provide the
media with access to new civil case initiating documents (complaints or petitions,
depending on the jurisdiction) on the same day they are filed, regardless of
whether processing has been completed (or in federal courts that have adopted efiling, the so-called "quality assurance" process is completed), and regardless of
whether the complaint or petition has been made available for electronic viewing.
Courthouse News Service has prepared the fol1owing summary of some of these
same-day access procedures adopted in courts throughout the nation.
Albuquerque

At the Second District Court of New Mexico (Bernalillo County). both paper and
electronically filed civil complaints are made available to the media in a "review
pile" on the day of filing, before they have been fully processed or made available
to the public. Courthouse News' reporter has been granted behind-the-counter
access to the "review pile" and provided with a small work space, where he can
review virtually all new cases on a same-day basis and scan any newsworthy
complaint using a portable scanner. Any complaint that does not make it to the
review pile enters a -three- to four-day docketing process, during which
Courthouse News Service's reporter can typically track down any case that needs
to be seen.
Atlanta
At the Fulton County Superior Court in' Atlanta, Georgia, new complaints are
scanned immediately upon filing and made available at computer terminals at the
courthouse. most within minutes of filing. In addition. complete docket
information for civil cases is available from a publicly accessible website on the
day the complaint is filed.
At the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, where efiling is voluntary, reporters review new civil actions on the same day they are
filed. New complaints that are filed in paper form are seamed into a
computerized press box before they go to docketing and are accessible on a
computer terminal in the clerk's office. E-filed complaints are made available to
Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
~n509 vi sa/"

Page I

Exhibit I
Page 16

ER 76

.~

2: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 18 of 62

Page ID #:21

CNS's reporter, prior to any processing, via PACER by using a shell case number
code to .access an online press queue of new same-day filings.
Austin

At the Travis County District Courthouse in Austin, where e-filing is mandatory
for civil cases, Courthouse News' reporter gets a list of all of the new civil
petitions filed earlier that same day upon arriving at the courthouse. She then
views newly filed petitions using a public access terminal at the courthouse.
Before leaving the court, Courthouse News' reporter gets an updated copy of the
list of newly filed petitions to see whether there are any that have been filed since
her first review, which she also views using the court's public access terminal,
BeaumoDt
At the Jefferson County Distrjct rourt jn; Beaumont, Texas, reporters are allowed
behind the counter to access paper copies of petitions filed that day, before the
cases are put through the docketing process. Reporters can make copies of
newsworthy cases.
At the Beaumont Division of the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Texas, reporters have same-day access to the vast majority of newly
filed actions regardless of whether docketing has been completed. Reporters
review scanned copies of new complaints via PACER, and if a new case is not yet
. scanned and available on the court's computer system, reporters can request and
are given a paper copy of the new action based on a listing of new filings in a red
log book made available to the press.
Brooklyo
At the Kings County Supreme Court, newly filed cases are typically scanned into
. electronic form immediately after they are filed, and the paper copies are then
placed in a designated media box for same day review. However, in the event
that a new complaint is not scanned immediately, the court will provide
Courthouse News' reporter with access to the unscanned document. Courthouse
News' reporter has been provided with a media pass that allows her to remove the
new filings from the media box and review them in a different area behind the
counter in the clerk's office on the same day the complaints are filed. Courthouse
News' reporter is free to make her own copies for a small fee.

Media Access
'7J509 ,I

..r

to

Courts Around the Nation

Page 2

Exhibit 1
Page 17

ER 77

G;lS3 Z: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 19 of 62 Page 10 #:22

At the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, parties
file "press copies" of new. coiPpfaints, which are placed into a press box that is
made available to reporters throughout the day, thereby allowing them same-day
access to the vast majority of new filings, even if the new filings have not been
fully processed or posted to PACER.
•

·l"li

";.\1

.

-

1;

Chicago
At the Cook County Circuit Court in Chicago, Courthouse News' reporter, or any
other member of the media who is first to arrive at the courthouse, begins each
visit by going behind the counter to pick up the day's new complaints, and then
brings them to a press room located in the same building. The reporter sees the
vast majority of new complaints on the same day they are filed, regardless of
whether the complaints have been fully processed, Reporters can stay as late as
they like to review the new complaints.
At the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, where
electronic filing of initiating docwnents is mandatory, newly filed complaints are
made available immediately upon filing through PACER, as well as the court's
own independent website.· .1.".
.

Cincinnati
At the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas in Cincinnati, Ohio, new
complaints are placed in the intake area for review by the media on the same day
the complaints are filed. Complaints are made available after they have been
date-stamped, but before any other processing occurs. Courthouse News'
reporter sees between 30-60 complaints each day, If Courthouse News' reporter
misses a complaint, he may request the file from the paper room staff the next
day. Court employees wil1 make copies of newsworthy complaints available
upon request for 10 cents per page.
At the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, many of the
newly filed complaints are made available on the day of filing via PACER
However, for cases not availabJe electronically. the court places a copy of new
cases into a press box at the intake counter, where Courthouse News Service's
reporter may review them until 4:00 p.m.when the court closes to the public.
The reporter may request copiesof new Gomplaints for 50 cents per page.
"..

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
~7l5D9.1.1lI"

!

PageJ

Exhibit I
Page 18

ER 78

CJ~ 2:11-cv-08083-R -MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 20 of 62 Page ID #:23

Cleveland
At the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas in Cleve1and, Ohio, Courthouse
News' reporter has behind-the-counter access to new filings on the same day they
are filed, regardJess of whether they have been fully processed. Complaints are
available as soon as they have been date-stamped. Court officials provide
Courthouse News' reporter with desk space to set up a laptop and scanner, and
allow him to disassemble the/base file and scan the original filings. Use of the
office copy machines is ,also permitted ~hen necessary.
At the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, new civil
cases can be filed either in person or electronically. Both cases filed
electronically and in person are made available on PACER on the same day they
are filed, However, to view cases that are restricted from access via PACER or
cases that have not yet been posted to PACER, Courthouse News' reporter visits
the courthouse, where the court staffwiIJ print out a copy of any case he requests,
even if docketing has not been comp1eted and regardless of how those complaints
were filed.

Columbus
At the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio in Columbus,
the vast majority of new complaints are made avaiJable on PACER promptly
upon filing. The court will also provide hard copies of any civil filings not
available on PACER on a same-day basis. but the speed with which cases are
posted to PACER generally niakes this'unnecessary .
. '.. :r~1-_..

I~

i

Dallas
At the Dallas County District Court in Dallas, Texas, Courthouse News' reporter
is provided with behind-the-counter access to new petitions as soon as they are
filed and before any docketing has taken place. The court provides the reporter
with a place to work, where staffers in the clerk's office provide him with access
to the new petitions filed in paper form, As for e-filed petitions, Courthouse
News Service's reporter views some on a computertenninal in the clerk's office.
In many instances, however, petitions are not available on the tenninaJ on a sameday basis, and the clerk's office provides him with paper printouts of those
petitions so that he can see them same-day.

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
1rI~~[)9

,I

Page 4

saf

..

:

"

Exhibit I
Page 19
ER 79

CS03 2: 11-cv-08083-R

The United

-MAN Docurnentt

".

Filed 09/29/11

States District Court for the NorthernDistrict

Page 21 of 62 Page ID #:24

of Texas

has developed

a process that ensures reporters have same-day access to all new complaints,
regardless of how far those complaints have progressed through the intake

process. On his daily afternoon visits to the court, Courthouse News' reporter
goes through a three-step process, described below. Leigh Lyon, Assistant Chief
Deputy of Operations, Dallas Division of the Northern District of Texas, has
informed us that she would be happy to speak with court officials in other
jurisdictions

about this system.

•

First, Courthouse News' reporter checks a computer term.ina1 in the clerk's
office to view summaries of the day's new complaints that have already
been made available oIl:PACER. Courthouse News' reporter then uses his
own internet connection to immediately download documents he needs to
his laptop computer at thecourthouse,

•

Second, Courthouse News' reporter checks for complaints that have been
scanned by the clerk's office, but are not yet available on PACER. These
complaints have been assigned a bar code and case number, and are made
available for electronic viewing at a public computer kiosk located in the
clerk's office, where the media can then review the new complaints on the
same day they are filed.

• Finally, for complaints that are so new they have not yet been scanned,
Courthouse News' reporter views the paper versions of those new cases in
their case folder and makes copies of newsworthy

complaints.

Detroit
At the Wayne County Circuit Court, complaints are placed in a drawer in the
intake area of the clerk's office immediately after they are filed. Upon arriving at
the clerk's office at approximately 3:00.p.m., Courthouse News' reporter goes
behind the counter and first double-checks the previous day's complaints, which
are located in bundled folders behind the intake drawer, for any missed or Iastminute filings from the day before. Then he turns to the intake drawer, where he
is permitted to review the newly filed complaints while standing behind the
counter. Most new complaints are in the drawer, but some are with the intake
clerks. who will share the complaints with the reporter for review. The reporter is
permitted to make his own copies of complaints using a copier located also
behind the counter, as well as an alternate copier on the other side of the cashier
station near the death certificates/marriage
license area.
Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
U73509.1 saf

PageS

Exhibit 1

Page 20

ER80

CS!fe 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 22 of 62

Page 10 #:25

. . f~-

At the United States District

Colirt fur tile Eastern District of Michigan,

the court
provides access to newly filed complaints electronically via PACER, both online
and at computer terminals set up in the clerk's office.
FortWortb
At the Tarrant County District Court in Fort Worth, most petitions appear on the
court's online system the day they are filed, except those cases that are mailed in
or filed by fax after the court closes at 5 :00 p.m., which are then made available
the following day. If any petition that was filed during court business hours is not
available online the day it is filed, Courthouse News' reporter arranges for the
petition to be immediately scanned and posted to the online access system. The
end result is that Courthouse News' reporter is able to access almost aJl petitions
filed during court hours on the same day they are filed.

Houston
The Harris County Civil Districti.CQurts in Houston provided same-day access for
many years by permitting reporters to gd;~behindthe intake counters and review
newly filed petitions. In 2008, the clerk began requiring reporters to wait until
new petitions had been processed and posted on the clerk's website before they
could be reviewed, which delayed their availability by a day or more - sometimes
several days. After repeated attempts by Courthouse News to negotiate a solution
with the clerk's office failed to lead to a resolution, Courthouse News reluctantly
filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In July 2009, the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction ordering the clerk to
provide same-day access to civil petitions, and finding that "the 24 to 72 hour
delay in access is effectively a denial of access and is, therefore,
unconstitutional."
Courthouse News Service v. Jackson; et al., 2009 WL
2163609, at *4 (S.D. Tex. July 20, 2009). In accordance with that injunction
order, the clerk's office began scanning new petitions and posting them to the
clerk's website the same day they are filed. Pursuant to a stipulated permanent
injunction entered by the court in March 2010, the clerk's office became
obligated not only to continue to provide same-day access to new civil filings, but
to pay more than $250,000 to Courthouse News to compensate it for the attorneys
fees it incurred in litigating thebi'se;· Th~ stipulated permanent injunction did not
specify the particular manner in which sake-day access must be provided, and the
clerk's office has chosen to comply-with the order by continuing its practice of
posting new petitions on the clerk's website. Those petitions can be viewed, and
Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
IITJS09.I,.r

Page 6

Exhibit 1
Page 21
ER 81

C8~ 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 23 of 62 Page 10 #:26

printouts can be made, free of charge by the media and other interested parties on
the day of filing. After that, petitions can still be viewed without charge, but
printouts can be made only if they have not been certified. Once they are
certified - which usually occurs the day after filing - there is a fee to print out
copies of the petitions. Details about this program CWl be found on the Harris
County District Clerk's webshef:"~t ':;
.
http ;1IWW\.V.hcdistrictcle~k.oomi.EdocslP~blic/search.aspx(see button: "Search
Today's Filings").
'
At the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, where
electronic filing is required for new cases, Courthouse News' reporter can view
electronic versions of complaints that are already docketed and posted to PACER
on the same day they are filed. For any new complaint that has not yet been fully
docketed, the court will usually provide a hard copy regardless of how far along
the complaint is in the docketing process, also on the same day they are filed.
Indianapolis

At the Marion County Circuit and Superior courts in Indianapolis, Indiana,
reporters view the vast majority of new filings on a same-day basis in the clerk's
office. Reporters are given stacks of the new filings, after they have been filed
and date stamped but before they are ful1y processed or sent to the proper court
division, and are allowed to gothrough them at tables in the public viewing area
from 4:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m; R-epprters 'can then make copies themselves on court
copy machines, whichare then billed to Courthouse News Service monthly.
At the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, reporters
are provided with access to virtually all complaints filed on a same-day basis,
even if docketing has not been completed. When Courthouse News' reporter
arrives at the end of the day, the court staff gathers all of the civil cases filed
throughout the day and allows the reporter to review the complaints. The court
staff will then make copies at a rate of 50 cents per page.
Las Vegas

At the Eighth Judicial District Court in Las Vegas, Nevada, reporters saw the
majority of new civil complaints on a same-day basis until the court switched to
mandatory e-filing in February 20lO. Following that switch, the court began
requiring news reporters to review new complaints at a computer terminal in the
clerk's office, but this system resulted in complaints not being available for
Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
IfTJS09 vi saf

."'".

-

,~
'."

Page 7

Exhibit 1
Page 22
ER 82

c~

2: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09129/11

Page 24 of 62 Page 10 #:27

viewing until the day after they were filed. The reason for these delays was that
new complaints did not appear on the computer terminals until after they had
been "accepted" by the clerk's office, and only after the terminals had been
updated to reflect the new filings. After Courthouse News brought these delays
to the attention of the court, the court adopted anew system: an electronic in-box.
through which complaints can be viewed on a computer terminal as soon as they
cross the electronic version of the intake counter at the clerk's office, even if they
have not yet been fully processed. Through this system, which is similar to the
electronic in-box access procedures in place at numerous federal district courts
(many of which are described in this survey), Courthouse News is now seeing
new e- filed complaints on a same-day basis .
. -;)~, «.

(:

At the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Courthouse News'
reporter can view electronic versions of the majority of new complaints on a
same-day basis on PACER. Complaints that are not made available on the day
they are filed are usually made available on the following day.

Los Angeles
At the Downtown (Stanley Mosk Courthouse) branch of the Superior Court of
California in Los Angeles. court staff upload the fun text of newly filed
complaints to the court's computer system after initial intake tasks. which include
scanning and assigning a case number, have been completed. Reporters can then
review the vast majority of new actions that are filed on a particular day at
terminals located at the courthouse that are available to the general public, or on
additional terminals located in a designated press room. Both the filing roomincluding the intake and processing areas - and the area in which the general
public view cases close at 4:30 p.m., but the press room remains open later and
even the latest filings ofth~~y are available and can be reviewed by 7:00 p.m.
About 110 new civil, general jurisdiction.cases are filed each day.
l

At the Santa Monica Courthouse of the same court, face pages of each day's
newly filed complaints are made available for review at 3 :30 p.m. on the same
day the complaints are filed Courthouse News' reporter then requests copies of
those complaints for which she wants to see the full-text versions. The full text of
late-filed complaints is made available at 4:30 p.m., when the filing room court
closes its doors to the public but where the courthouse employees continue to
work until 5:00 p.m. Courthouse News' reporter can then request copies of any
of those late-filed complaints) and they are generally provided right away.

Media

Access to Courts ATOIH\d tile Nation

Page 8

~7)S09"1.. t

Exhibit 1
Page 23

ER83
:l ••

cs~

2: 11-cv-OB083-R -MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 25 of 62 Page 10 #:28

At the United States District Court for the Central District of Cali fomi a, a room is
set up directly off the docketing department with a set of pass-through boxes.
Sometime between 4:30 and 5:00 p.m., a court staffer places a large majority of
the civil complaints filed that day in the pass-through boxes so that the media can
review them. Reporters that cover the courthouse on a daily basis have a key to
the room, which is otherwise locked, and they can stay as long as they want to
look over the complaints and rulings, copy those of interest, and put the
documents back in the pass-through boxes.
Louisville

At the

Jefferson County Circuit Court in Louisville, Kentucky, the clerk's staff
makes a copy of the front page of all complaints tiled throughout the day and
places the coversheets on a table in the public area of the office. Courthouse
News' reporter then reviews the stack ofcoversheets and requests any complaints
he determines to be newsworthy-on the same day they are filed. The clerk's
office will make copies for him at a mte of 25 cents per page.
The United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky in

LouisviUe has adopted W1 e-filing system requiring initiating documents to be
filed electronically. Courthouse News' reporter is able to review newly filed
complaints in exactly the same format as they are received in the clerk's office,
prior to being docketed and before they are available to the public on PACER, by
using a shell case number code to access an electronic press queue of new filings
on PACER, both online and at public computer terminals at the courthouse.
Manhattan

At the New York County Supreme Court, where certain case types are required to
be e-filed, new complaints are made available to reporters on the same day they
are filed, whether they are filed in paper or electronic form. E-filed cases are
posted online to a court website by the end of the day they are filed, while new
complaints filed in paper fomii'are _
indexed and scanned shortly after being filed,
_
l
_
and made available electronically'viaan internal computer system on terminals
set up throughout the courthouse. At 3:36 p.m., and then at regular intervals until
4:45 p.m., the paper versions of the new complaints are then placed by court
officials in a secure area behind the counter where reporters are free to review
them on a same-day basis.

Media

Access

N7150hl..r

to Courts

Around

the Nation

Page 9

Exhibit 1
Page 24

ER84

~

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1 Filed 09/29111

Page 26 of 62 Page ID #:29

At the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York,
reporters are permitted to view new civil complaints three times a day - between
9:00 a.m. and 9:45 a.m., between 11:30 a.m. and 12:15 p.m., and between 3:45
p.m. and 4:30 p.m. - on.the sameday the-complaints are filed.
Martinez
At the Contra Costa County Superior Court in Martinez, California, the court
closes its doors to the public at 3:00 p.m. each day. However, those still in line at
that time are allowed to remain in the clerk's office to complete their filings, and
the clerk's staff continue their work at the court until at least 5:00 p.m. Although
Courthouse News had previously experienced delays in access at this court, court
staff recently implemented new access procedures after Courthouse News brought
the issue of delays to the attention of both the court's head clerk and its presiding
judge. Under those procedures, filed civil unlimited jurisdiction complaints are
placed in a media bin at approximately 4:00 p.m. each day, and Courthouse News'
reporter is permitted to remain at the court until 4:45 p.m. to review those
complaints, the result of which is same-day access to the vast majority of newly
filed unlimited jurisdiction complaints .
." ...
Miami
......... -,- '.,
F

At the United States Oistrict Court for the Southern District of Florida, electronic
filing of new civil complaints is mandatory, and new complaints that are filed
before 5:00 p.m. appear on PACER on the same day they are filed. Cases filed
after 5 :00 p.m. appear on PACER the foHowing day.
Milwaukee

At the Milwaukee County Court in Wisconsin, reporters have access to new
complaints on the day they are filed, even if they have not yet been fully
processed, and are permitted to go behind the counter. Reporters can request
copies of complaints from court personnel for a small fee.
At the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, most
new complaints are e-filed and available electronically through PACER on the
same day they are filed. However, for those cases that are not immediately
posted to PACER, court staff'provides reporters with the original paper versions
of the new complaints, also on the same day they are filed. Reporters are then
able to make copies at a copy machine
a nominal fee.

for

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
~73S0~ vIsor

Page 10

Exhibit 1
Page 25

ER85

C'88 2: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Filed 09/29/11

Document 1

Page 27 of 62 Page ID #:30

Millneapolis/St. Paul

A t both the Hennepin County District Court in Minneapolis and the Ramsey
County District Court in St. Paul, where many of the new complaints are filed by
mail, Courthouse News' reporter is permitted to go behind the counter to review
the stack of original complaints on the same day they are filed and before they are
docketed. Because the reporter visits Ramsey County only three times per week,
she is unable to review all cases on tbesame day they are filed, but is able to
search for and view the cases she-has nii~sed on a computertenninal at the
courthouse the next time 'she visits th'e c6urt. The reporter is able to make her
own copies in Hennepin County, where Courthouse News has established a copy
account. In Ramsey County, for cases the reporter reviews on the day of filing,
the court staff will make copies of any complaint the reporter requests. For cases
she reviews after the day of filing, the reporter is able to print a copy directly
from the computer terminal.
At the United States District Court for District of Minnesota, reporters begin their
visit by using a computer terminal at the courthouse to view an intake log of new
cases, From there, reporters review complaints available on PACER using a
public computer terminal in the clerk' s office. If a complaint shown on the intake
log of new cases is not yet available on PACER, the court wiU print out a copy
for the reporter. The clerk charges 10 cents per page for any copies that reporters
request.
Nashville
,.

At the Davidson County ChanCery Coutfin Nashville, Courthouse News' reporter
reviews an intake log of the day's new filings on a public computer terminal at
the courthouse. She then compiles a list of the relevant cases and presents the list
to the court staff, who retrieve the requested cases and allow her to review the
complaints regardless of whether the docketing process has been completed.
At the Davidson County Circuit Court, most new complaints are scanned
throughout the day and are made available through a government website on the
same day they are filed.
At the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, the
clerk's staff are required to stay one hour after closing in order to scan all new
filings and post them onto PACER on the day they are filed.

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
;"'-:-

Page 11
.,-

Exhibit 1
Page 26

ER86

caVe 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29111

Page 28 of 62

Page ID #:31

Oakland

Although the Alameda County Superior Court in Oakland; California, endeavors
to make newly filed complaints available for viewing on its website on a sameday basis, it has implemented procedures to ensure that news reporters who visit
the Rene C. Davidson courthouse can obtain same-day access to those complaints
that would otherwise not be posted for electronic viewing on a same-day basis.
Under those procedures, reporters are provided with access to a workstation
behind the intake counter. The station is equipped with a computer connected to
the Internet Courthouse News' reporter first reviews the cases that are made
avai1able online. For those cases that are not available online by the end of the
work day but are of media interest, court staffers scan and make those cases
available on their website.
., ~Oklahoma City

At the Oklahoma County Court, intake clerks place all of the day's new petitions
into a centra1 basket by 3: 15 p.m. Petitions placed in the basket have been date
stamped, but have not been fully docketed - only indexed. A member of the
clerk's staff then provides the petitions to Courthouse News' reporter, and the
reporter is instructed to sign the back of each petition to ensure that she has seen
them all. After she has completed her review of the petitions in the basket,
Courthouse News' reporter is permitted to review any further petitions that have
been filed, indexed and placed in the basket after 3:15 p.rn, The reporter may
request copies of petitions at a rate of $1.00 for the first page and 50 cents for aU
subsequent pages.
Omaha

At the Douglas County District Court, where new complaints can be filed
e1ectronically or in paper form, new cases are immediately indexed and added to
a statewide computer database that is updated on an hourly basis. Courthouse
News' reporter reviews the index'information for relevant cases on a courthouse
computer terminal and downloads images as they become available. Downloads
are free at the courthouse, but are also available online via the statewide Justice
website for a fee.

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
r7JSO~ vi ~f

Page J2

Exhibit 1

Page 27

ER8?

CfftJ 2: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 29 of 62 Page 10 #:32

Orlando
At the Ninth Judicia1 Circuit Court, Courthouse News' reporter reviews hard
copies of newly filed complaints at a designated desk behind the counter. The
staff places new complaints that have not undergone any processing (i.e.,
docketed, jacketed or assigned a case number) near the reporter's desk each day
for same-day viewing. Since some complaints have been docketed by the time
Courthouse News' reporter arrives, these complaints are placed in a separate pile
for the reporter's review before they are moved to a separate desk for scanning by
4:00 p.m. In addition, Courthouse News' reporter is permitted to review e-filed
complaints and complaints that have been docketed and scanned by the time the
reporter arrives on a same-day basis using one of the clerk's terminals located
behind the counter.
At the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida in Orlando,
where electronic filing is mandatory, the court posts the majority of new civil
filings to PACER on the same day they are filed.
P&6enix

At the Maricopa County Superior Court in Phoenix, Arizona, court staff recently
implemented new procedures to ensure same-day access to civil complaints filed
at its downtown location. Under the new procedures, court staff scan and upload
for electronic viewing all complaints filed before 3:00 p.m., which are then made
available on a designated press computer located in the Customer Service Center
for Courthouse News' reporter to review and. ifnecessary, print. Complaints
filed between 3:00 and 5:00 p.m. are inunediately placed in a bin at a designated
intake window in the Central Court Building, where Courthouse News' reporter
may review those complaints between 4:00 and 5:00 p.m.
Pittsburgh
At the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
where the court has implemented an internally operated electronic filing system,

nearly all of the day's new filings are available on-line on a same-day basis.
Complaints not posted to the court's website on the day offiling are made
available the following day.
:' 1

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
I17HO~ ~l .af

Pllge IJ

Exhibit 1
Page 28

ER88

c~

2: 11-cv-OB083-R -MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 30 of 62 Page ID #:33

In the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania,
where electronic filing is mandatory, Courthouse News' reporter has been
provided with an uMC" case number code for PACER that allows her to view the
new filings before they are docketed.
Portland

At the Multnomah COW1ty Court in Portland, Courthouse News' reporter is given
a stack of the current day's newly filed complaints, which she reviews at a cubicle
behind the counter. The reporter can make any needed copies herself using her
own portable scanner.
At the United States District Court for the District of Oregon, Courthouse News'
reporter first searches for newly filed complaints through the court's "electronic
in-box," which is available on a public access terminal at the courthouse and
contains those complaints that the clerks have scanned but not yet processed and
posted to PACER. She then searches for processed complaints on PACER, which
are also available at a public access tenninaJ at the courthouse. Finally, the clerks
give Courthouse News' reporter paper copies of those complaints that have not
yet been scanned and posted either to the electronic in-box or to PACER. The
clerks will also review the court's record book with Courthouse News' reporter at
the end of the day to make sure that no filings have been missed.
Riverside
,
At the Superior Court for-the State of California, County of Riverside, new
complaints are scanned and made available for electronic viewing via the court's
website and at computer terminals in the courthouse. The press had been
experiencing delays in access for years until a new clerk, formerly from the

United States District Court for the Central District of California, came on board.
The clerk found that same-day access could be achieved simply by shifting the
schedules of the personnel who scan complaints so that they begin and end work
later in the day, thus ensuring that the vast majority of new complaints would be
made available for electronic viewing on a same-day basis.
St. Louis
At the St. Louis City Circuit Court in Missouri, Courthouse News' reporter goes
to the intake window where cases are filed and clerk's office staff members hand
the reporter a stack of new cases filed that same day. Courthouse News' reporter
Media Access to Courts Around the Nation

N73SlW.1 •• r

Page 14

Exhibit 1
Page 29

ER89

'I

~@3 2:11-cv-08083-R

Filed 09/29/11

-MAN Document 1

Page 31 of 62 Page 10 #:34

works at the counter next to the intake window; however, members of the media
can also work at a table near the window. Staffmembers in the clerk's office will
provide members of the media with copies of newsworthy new cases free of
charge.
At the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, where
new complaints must be electronically filed, each case is assigned a case number
upon filing by the attorney and is immediately made available on PACER, even if
it has not been fully reviewed and processed. Courthouse News' reporter is able
to view the new complaints on a computer tenninaJ in the clerk's office and print
out copies for a small fee.

.

"

San Fi"anciseo
,
,.

At the Superior Court of California for the County of San Francisco, news
reporters are allowed behind the counter into the stacks to review unlimited
numbers of new filings after providing a driver's license and filling out a
temporary name tag. The number of new filings per day varies. but often exceeds
50. Courthouse News views new complaints regardless of whether they have
been fully processed. San Francisco Superior has established a written protocol
for members of the press. The key provisions are quoted below:
If media personnel want to review files already on the shelves, they
can pull these files themselves and return them to the shelves.
All new filings will be held in a Media Box during the day. Between
3 :00 and 4:30 each day, this box will be available to the media for
viewing in the Records department, whether or not the cases have
been entered in the computer. At 4:00 PM, when the office closes to
the public, media personnel may ask to view any additional filings
that may have come in since :3 ~o6
PM. The Records supervisor or an
assigned clerk will retrieve those files for the media to view. Any
member of the media viewing new filings must return them to the
box for eventual return to the Records supervisor or assigned clerk.
Media personnel may corne in anytime before 3 :00 PM to view new
filings. However, they will only be viewing cases newly filed up
until that time.

Media Access
.nSD9.I,of

to

Couns Around the Nation

Page 15

Exhibit 1
Page 30

ER 90

cgsra 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 32 of 62 Page ID #:35

Copy machine from the second floor Media Room will be moved to
Room 103 and located behind the Records department This
machine belongs to Courthouse News Service, but has been made
available to all media personnel for their use.
At the San Francisco Division of the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Californi a, reporters go behind the counter and review actions filed
that same day, regardless of whether the complaints have been fully docketed or
posted on PACER. They are also permitted access to "transfer boxes" of new
actions being sent to different divisions of the court, and are provided with a copy
of the intake Jog. Reporters are permitted to make copies of cases they determine
to be newsworthy using a portable scanner.
San Jose

At the Santa Clara County Superior Court in San Jose, California, the court
recently implemented new procedures to 'ensure that reporters receive same-day
access to the vast majority of each day' s~ew civil unlimited jurisdiction
complaints. Under those procedures, ciVil unlimited complaints are made
available to Courthouse News' reporter upon receipt of the filing fee, the
assignment of a case number, and the assignment of a first status conference date.
even though processing of the new complaint is far from over at this juncture.
Complaints that are filed over the counter by 3:30 p.m, are made available to
Courthouse News' reporter on the same day they are filed. All unlimited
jurisdiction complaints that are in the drop box by 4:00 p.m. are also made
available to Courthouse News on the same day they are fi1ed. Unlimited
jurisdiction complaints that are filed over the counter between 3:30 p.m. and the
clerk's office closing at 4:00 p.m. have been designated as a staff priority, and the
court endeavors to make them available for review on the same day they are filed.
Courthouse News' reporter is permitted to remain at the court until 4:30 p.m., one
haIf-hour after closing, to review late-filed cases. The court makes copies of
complaints as requested by the reporter.
At the San Jose Division of the UnitedStates District Court for the Northern
District of California, clerks pt~l out aiH~tof all new complaints filed earlier that

day. Reporters go behind the counter, obtain complaints from individual clerks'
desks, report on and scan any newsworthy complaints, and then return the
complaints to the clerks' desks.

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
II1JSO~ vl

53f

Page 16

Exhibit I
Page 31
ER 91

~

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 33 of 62 Page 10 #:36

Seattle

At the King County Superior Court, Courthouse News' reporter is provided with
a docket report of new cases ,two times per day - once at 11:00 a.m. and again at
3=00 p.m. The II ;00 a.m. Iist'ineludesall cases that have been filed from 3:00
p.m. on the previous day through II :00 a.m, on the current day, while the 3:00
p.m. list includes new cases that have been fiJed from 11:00 a.m. to 3 :00 p.m. that
day. The reporter reviews each list to find relevant cases, then searches for and
views new complaints on a computer tenninaJ at the courthouse. She is able to
print out relevant complaints for 15 cents per page.
Tampa
At the Hillsborough County Circuit Court, new complaints that are hand-filed in
the main courthouse are made available for review by reporters at the end of the
day they are filed. Most complaints are scanned by court staff and made available
on the court's public access terminals for review. Those complaints that are not
scanned and available on the public access terminals by 4:00 p.m. are provided in
paper form for news reporters, who have until the court closes at 5:00 p.m. to
review those late-filed complaints.

.>,

re-.

Wilmington
10 ••

,

the

At the United States District Court for
District of Delaware, new complaints
can be filed either in paper form or electronically. Courthouse News' reporter
can view e- filed complaints on PACER almost inunediately after they are filed by
using a shell case number code to access an online press queue of new electronic
filings. The reporter also visits the court on a daily basis and is able to review the
vast majority of new complaints filed in paper form on the same day those
complaints are filed. Court staff will make copies of paper- filed cases for 10
cents per page.

"j"

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
J13~09vl .. r

"

Page 17

Exhibit I
Page 32

ER92

C9~ 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 34 of 62 Page ID #:37

EXHIBIT 2

ER93

~
,

2:11-cv-08083-R -MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29111

Page 35 of 62 Page 10 #:38

.

Holme Roberts & Owen UP
AttOf1lq.l"

SAN FRANCISCO

BOULDER

aJ

Law

June 20, 2011
Michael Planet
Court Executive Officer
Ventura County Superior Court
800 South Victoria Ave.
Ventura, CA 93009
Re:

Media Access to New Complaints

COLORADO SPRINGS

Dear Mr. Planet:

DENVER

DUBLIN

LONDON

LOS ANGElES

SALT lAKE GIN

As you may recall, we represent Courthouse News Service, a nationwide news service for
lawyers and the news media. Over the past two years, Courthouse News has written to and
met with various officials at this Court regarding delays in access to newly filed civil
unlimited complaints .: Although your office has undertaken to decrease the amount of time
between the filing of a complaint and its availability to members of the news media, news
reporters are rarely permitted to see any new civil complaints on the same day they are
filed. Rather, delays in access range anywhere from one day to several weeks.

It appears that the Court is not currently releasing newly filed complaints for press review
until after a certain amount of processing has been completed. However, as explained
below, the press's right of access to court records is not dependent on a court having
completed processing.' Indeed. the delays at this Court are effectively denials of access,
and are contrary to the fundamentally public nature of adjudicative court records and the
media's legitimate interest in timely access to those records.
We therefore respectfully ask that you address these delays immediately by adopting
simple procedures to ensure that members of the media have access to new complaints on
the same day they are filed.
About Courthouse News Service
Courthouse News Service is a 21-year-old. Pasadena-based legal news service for lawyers
and the news media. It is similar to other news wire services, such as the Associated Press,
except that it focuses on civil lawsuits, from the date of filing through the appellate level.
Courthouse News does not report on criminal or family law matters, and in California it
focuses only on unlimited jurisdiction ci vii cases.

Rachel Matle0-8oehm 415.268.1996 rachelmatteo-boehm@hro.c;om
560 Mission Street. 25th Floor San Fram:isCQ,California 9~105-2994 lei 41 ~.268.2000 fax [phone]
N6]4~9

v4lOr

Exhibit 2
Page 33

ER 94

,Cmr 2: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 36 of 62 Page 10 #:39

,'

Bohne RooertB & Owenur
Altomep at LaID

Michael Planet
June 20, 2011
Page 2
The majority of Courthouse News' nearly 3,000 subscribers nationwide are lawyers and
law firms, including numerous prominent California firms, In addition, other news outlets
are increasingly looking to Courthouse News to provide them with information about
newsworthy new civil filings. Courthouse News' media subscribers include such wellknown entities as the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles Business Journal, the San Jose
Mercury News, and Forbes, all of which puts Courthouse News in a position similar to that
of a pool reporter. Courthouse News' core news publications are its new litigation reports,
which are e-mailed to subscribers daily and contain coverage ofall significant new civil
complaints. Its website, www.courthousenews.com. also features news reports and
commentary about civil cases and appeals, and receives an average of 850,000 unique
visitors each month.
Access to Court Records at Ventura Couoty Superior Court
Courthouse News' reporter JuJianna Krolak has covered the Ventura County Superior
Court since 2003. Until recently. Ms. Krolak visited the court twice each week 10 review
new civil unlimited jurisdiction complaints. In recognition of the growing importance of
this Court, starting in November 201 0, Ms. Krolak began visiting the Court on a daily
basis.
Up until early 2008. Ms. i<:ro'iakWa:s.abl~ to review the vast majority of new complaints
filed since her prior visit. This was achieved through a combination of a media bin
procedure (which, at the time, contained complaints that the Court determined would be of
interest to the press) as well as the clerk's office's practice of providing Ms. Krolak with
all additional complaints falling within a specific number range, since cases are numbered
sequentially. In general, these procedures allowed Ms. Krolak to review all of'the
newsworthy unlimited jurisdiction complaints filed since her previous visit without
imposing any apparent burden on court staff.
Beginning in 2008, however, media access at the Court began to deteriorate on a number
of fronts. Among other things, the clerk.' s office began limiting the number of files that
members of the media could request to 25 each day, and only permitted reporters to request
five at a time, which meant Ms. Krolak had to wait in line .. usually for at least 30 minutes,
and sometimes more than an hour - to ask for each batch of f ve cases. Each requested
case counted toward her 25-file limit, even if the complaint was not made available for

~6W9vo1l'(

Exnibit 2
Page 34
ER 95

~

2:11 ~cv~08083~R ~MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 37 of 62

Page ID #:40

,
, ,.
-,

Holme Roberts & Owen u.r
Attomt!)'1 at

LaIl1

Michael Planet
June 20. 20] ]
Page 3
review, and Court staff sometimes counted every case in the media bin toward Ms.
Krolak's 25~case quota. Since there were often more than 50 potentially newsworthy civil
unlimited cases filed in any given week. the 2S-file limit frequently prevented Ms. Krolak
from reviewing and reporting on all of the week's newsworthy filings, thereby resulting in
significant delays in access to newly filecJ civil complaints.
Courthouse News' Northern Califomia Bureau Chief, Chris Marshall, attempted at various
times to resolve these issues with Supervisor Linda Daniels, as well as Records Manager
Peggy Yost, but these efforts proved unsuccessful. Thereafter, in April 2009, we wrote to
you. We subsequently spoke on the phone, together with Deputy Court Executive Officer
Cheryl Kanatzar, about potential solutions to the access problems. In June 2009, Ms.
Kanatzar, as well as Ms. Yost and Ms. Daniels, met in person with Mr. Marshall to further
discuss potential solutions. The solution ultimately devised by the Court involved placing
newly filed civil unlimited jurisdiction complaints directly into the media bin for review
only after minimal processing. Ms. Krolak would be permitted access to all of the
complaints contained in the media bin, as well as up to 25 additional complaints, per visit,
from the shelves. Of the additional 25 complaints that Ms. Krolak would be permitted to
request. she could only access five complaints at a time.
While these procedures initially worked reasonably well to provide Ms. Krolak with timely
access to newly filed complaints, access again quickly deteriorated, as it seemed that the
clerks were waiting until newly filed complaints were fully processed before placing them
in the media bin (contrary to the agreement that new complaints would be placed in the bin
after just minimal processing). The deterioration of the media bin procedure led to a
backlog of newly filed unlimited civil jurisdiction complaints that Ms. Krolak needed to
review. and she therefore had to request numerous additional complaints as part of her
daily reporting activities. On many of her visits, she found that she had to request up to 25
complaints (her limit for cases tliat were riot contained in the media bin) in order to see the
entire flow of newly filed unlimited civil jurisdiction complaints, standing in a new and
lengthy line for each group offive complaints she-wished to review. Even with respect to
those 2S additional complaints she requested. many were not available, with delays in
access ranging for the most part from One to three days, but sometimes significantly
longer.

1I6.l4S9 v4

"r

Exhibit 2
Page 35

ER96

<~e

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Holme Roher1B. & Owen UP"
Attomep

at

Filed 09/29/11

Page 38 of 62 Page 10 #:41

..
,.

Law

Michael Planet
June 20, 2011
Page 4
As noted,late last year, Courthouse News began covering the Court on a daily basis.
Given the ongoing delays and problems with the media bin procedure, Mr. Marshall
contacted Ms. Kanatzar by letter in February 20 I] in an attempt to come up with mutually
agreeable procedures that would provide same-day access to all newly filed unlimited civil
jurisdiction complaints, and Ms. Kanatzar spoke with Mr. Marshall by phone in early
March 2011 to discuss options. While Ms. Kanatzar indicated a desire to improve on the
delays. the message conveyed to Courthouse News was that the clerk's office would not
provide same-day access to newly filed uniimite<ijurisdiction civil complaints. At best.
the Court would attempt to provide next-day access. Mr. Marshall was disappointed to
hear this, but agreed to wait and see what solution the Court came up with to resolve
delays. Subsequently. Ms. Kanatzar left. Mr. Marshall a voice mail message advising him
that beginning on March 14, 2fhl, the clerks would reprioritize how cases are processed,
and Courthouse News should begin seeing complaints within two days of filing.
Over the past three months, Courthouse News bas monitored the availability of complaints
to determine what effect. if any. the new procedures would have in tenus of delays in
access. Unfortunately, things have gone from bad to worse. with same-day access to new
complaints a rare occurrence. I Rather. actual delays in access are anywhere between one
day and several weeks after filing for virtually all civil unlimited jurisdiction complaints
filed in this Court.
There Is A Rigbt Of Access, And Timely Access, To All New Civil Court Filings

A1> we have related to you in our previous correspondence and discussions, the press has a
presumptive. constitutional right of timely access to newly filed complaints, which
necessarily means same-day access. NBC Subsidiary (KNEe-TV), Inc. v. Superior Court,
20 Cal. 4'h 1178, 1208 & n.25 (1999) (recognizing First Amendment right of access to civil
litigation documents submitted to a court as a basis for adjudication); Associated Press v.
u.s. District Court, 705 F.2d 1143, 1147 (~Cir. 1983)(even short delays in access
constitute «a total restraint on the public's first amendment right of access even though the
restraint is limited in time"); Grove Fresh Distribs., Inc. v. Everfresh Juice Co., 24 FJd
J During one recent four-week ~e~od. only one complaint out of 145 was available for
review on the same day it was filed.

~6]459 v4 sar

Exhibit 2
Page 36

ERg?

~~

2: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 39 of 62 Page ID #:42

Hom Roberts & Owen ur
Attorneys at Law

Michael Planet
June 20,2011
Page 5
893,897 (7th Cir. 1994)("[i]n light of values which the preswnption of access endeavors
to promote, a necessary corollary to the presumption is that once found to be appropriate,
access should be immediate and contemporaneous"); Globe Newspaper Co. v. Pokaski,
868 F.2d 497, 507 (1 st Cir, 1989) ("even a one to two day delay impermissibly burdens the
First Amendment"); Courthouse News Service v. Jackson, 2009 U.S. Dist, LEXIS 62300,
at ...] 0-11, ]4 (S.D. Tex. 2009) ('~e 24 to 72 hour delay in access is effectively a denial of
access and is, therefore, unconstitutional").
Likewise, once a record has been filed or lodged with the court, Rule of Court 2.550(c)
provides that the record is "presumed to be open" to public inspection. The Rule of Court
thus recognizes that the public character of new complaints comes not from the court's
taking any particular action with respect to a complaint, but from a person's invoking the
power of the judiciary by submitting it to the court. See also Bank of Am. Nat 'I Trust &
Sav. Ass 'n v. Hotel Rittenhouse Assocs., 800 F.2d 339, 344 (3d Cir, J 986) (the right of
access springs into being the moment a person "undertakers] to utilize the judicial
process"); Leucadia, Inc. v. Applied Extrusion Techs., Inc., 998 F.2d 157, 164 Od Cir,
1993) ("By submitting pleadings and motions to the court for decision, one ... exposes
oneself (to] public scrutiny.") (quotation. omitted; emph. added).
In light of this right of access, it is not appropriate for this Court to deny media requests to
examine newly filed complaints on the ground that the Court has not yet completed its
administrative tasks associated with the processing ofthose complaints (tasks that vary
from court to court, but can include such items as inputting information about the
complaint into a computer system, fonnal acceptance, scanning, and/or posting the
complaint online for remote viewing). As. you can see from the enclosed city-by-city
survey, courts MOund the country have implemented a variety of procedures to ensure that
the press has access to all new civil complaints at the end of the day on which those
complaints are filed, regardless of whether they have been fully processed and/or other
administrative procedures have been completed. Indeed, given the media's roJe as
"surrogates for the public," see, e.g., Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S.
555,573 (1980), it is appropriate to provide news reporters who visit the Court every day
with procedures for obtaining same-day access to new filings, so that those reporters may
in tum disseminate information about those filings to interested persons, thereby keeping
the public informed as to what transpires in the courts.

\

I

#63459 11 sal

Exhibit 2
Page 37

ER98

.C~2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 40 of 62

Page 10 #:43

"

Holme RobertB & Owen urAttonrep at Law

Michael Planet
June 20,2011

Page 6
With these considerations in mind, Courthouse News once again respectfully requests that
the Court adopt procedures 'to ensure that reporters who visit the court every day (which
would include but not necessarily be limited to Courthouse News) can review new
unlimited civil complaints at the end of the day they are filed, even if they have not been
fully processed. As the enclosed survey demonstrates, there are a variety of specific ways
this can be accomplished, but fundamentally, what we are asking for is for Ms, Krolak to
simply be allowed to see the day's new unlimited civil filings at the en~ of each court day.
We thank you for your attention to this important manner, and look forward to hearing
from you.
.
Sincerely,

Rachel Matteo-Boehm
CC:

The Honorable Vincent O'Neill, Jr., Presiding Judge
Courthouse News Service

"6)4~9.4sa r

Exhibit 2
Page 38

ER99
;,

_C~OO:11-cv-08083-R -MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29111

Page 41 of62

Page ID #:44

Media' Access to Courts Around the Nation
Prepared

By Courthouse News Service
June 2011

Courts around the country have developed a variety of procedures to provide the media with
access to new civil case initiating documents (complaints or petitions, depending on the
jurisdiction) on the same day they are filed, regardless of whether processing has been
completed (or in federal courts that have adopted e-filing, the so-called "quality assurance"
process is completed). and regardless of whether the complaint or petition has been made
available for electronic viewing. Courthouse News Service has prepared the following
summary of some of these same-day access procedures adopted in courts throughout the nation.
Albuquerqu.e
At the Second District Court of New Mexico (Bernalillo County), both paper and electronically
filed civil complaints are made available to the media in a "review pile" on the day of filing.
before they have been fully processed or made available to the public. Courthouse News'
reporter has been granted behind-the-counter access to the "review pile" and provided with a
small work space. where he can review-the new cases and scan any newsworthy complaint
using a portable scanner. Any complaint that does not make it to the review pile enters a 3 - 4
day docketing process, during which Courthouse News Service's reporter can typically track
down any case that needs to be seen.
Atlanta
At the Fulton County Superior Court in Atlanta, Georgia, new complaints are scanned
immediately upon filing and made available at computer terminals at the courthouse, most
within minutes of filing. In addition, complete docket information for civil cases is available
from a publicly accessible web site on the day the complaint is filed.
At the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, where e-filing is
voluntary, reporters review new civil actions on the same day they are filed. New complaints
that are filed in paper form are scanned into a computerized press box before they go to
docketing and are accessible on a computer terminal in the Clerk's office. E-filed complaints
are made available to eNS's reporter, prior to any processing, via PACER by using a shell case
number code to access an online press queue of new same-day filings.

At the Travis County District Courthouse iii AUstin, where e-filing is mandatory for civil cases,
Courthouse News' reporter gets a list of aU of the new civil petitions filed earlier that same day
upon arriving at the courthouse. She then views newly filed petitions using a public access
terminal at the courthouse, Before leaving the court, Courthouse News' reporter gets an
updated copy of the list of newly filed petitions to see whether there are any that have been
filed since her first review, which she also views using the court's public access terminal,
Media Access
.~741 .. 1 .. r

[0

Courts Around the Nation

Page I

Exhibit 2
Page 39
ER 100

Gnp12:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 42 of 62 Page 10 #:45

Beaumont
At the Jefferson County District Court in Beaumont, Texas, reporters are allowed behind the
counter 10 access paper copies of petitions filed that day. before the cases are put through the
docketing process. Reporters can make copies .bf newsworthy cases.
]

.

At the Beaumont Division o{the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas,
reporters have same-day access to newly filed actions regardless of whether docketing has been
completed. Reporters review scanned copies of new complaints via PACER., and if a new case
is not yet scanned and available on the court's computer system, reporters can request and are
given a paper copy of the new action based on a listing of new filings in a red log book made
available to the press.
.
Brooklyn
At the Kings County Supreme Court, newly filed cases are typically scanned into electronic
form immediately after they are filed. and the paper copies are then placed in a designated
media box for same day review. However. in the event that a new complaint is not scanned
until the following day, the paper copy remains in the press box until Courthouse News'
reporter has reviewed it. Courthouse News' reporter has been provided with a media pass that
allows her to remove the new filings from the media box and review them in a different area
behind the counter in the clerk's office on the same day the complaints are filed. Courthouse
News' reporter is free to make her own copies for a small fee,
At the United States District
copies" of new complaints,
throughout the day, thereby
even ifthe new filings have

Court for the Eastern District of New York, parties file "press
which ate placed ifit6 II press box that is made available to reporters
allowing them sameJdaY access to the vest majority of new filings,
not been fully processed or posted to PACER.
Chicago
!
i

At the Cook County Circuit Court in Chicago, Courthouse News' reporter, or any other
member of the media who is first to arrive at the courthouse, begins each visit by going behind
the counter to pick up the day's new complaints, Wid then brings them to a press room located
in the same building. The reporter sees complaints on the same day they are filed, regardless of
whether the complaints have been fully processed. Reporters can stay as late as they like to
review the new complaints.
At the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. where newly filed
complaints are available on a same-day basis, the court bad previously provided the media with
a special case number code for the PACER web site that granted reporters access to a press
queue where the new complaints were posted before they had even been assigned a case
number or appeared on the public PACER website. However. the Court is now making newlyfiled civil complaints immediately available on PACER. as wen as the court's own independent
website, mak.ing access to the press 9':leue unnecessary.
,.

Media Access [0 Courts Around the Nation
N6ZH7 vi sef

.

Page 2

Exhibit 2

Page 40
ER 101

C'fl@22:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 43 of 62 Page 10 #:46

Cincinnati
At the Hamilton County CoUI1 of Common Pleas in Cincinnati, Ohio, new complaints are
placed in the intake area for review by the media on the same day the complaints are filed.
Complaints are made available after they have been date-stamped, but before any other
processing occurs. Courthouse News' reporter sees between 30-60 complaints each day. If
Courthouse News' reporter misses a complaint, he may request the file from the paper room
staff the next day. Court employees will make copies of newsworthy complaints available
upon request for I 0 cents per page.
;~

At the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, many of the newly filed
complaints are made available on the day of filing via PACER. However, for cases not
available electronically, the court places a copy
new cases into a press box at the intake
counter, where Courthouse News Services' reporter may review them until 4:00 p.m, when the
court closes to the public. The reporter may request copies of new complaints for 50 cents per

of

page.
Cleveland

At the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas in Cleveland, Ohio, Courthouse News'
reporter bas behind-the-counter access to new filings on the same day they are filed, regardless
of whether they have been fully processed. Complaints are available as soon as they have been
date-stamped. Court officials provide Courthouse News' reporter with desk space to set up a
laptop and allow him use of the office copy machines.
At the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, new civil cases can be
filed either in person or electronically. Both cases filed electronically and in person are made
avai Iable on PACER on the same day they are fiIed. However, to view cases that are restricted
from access via PACER or cases that have not yet been posted to PACER, Courthouse News'
reporter visits the courthouse, where the court staffwill print out a copy of any case he
requests, even if docketing has not been completed and regardless of how those complaints
were filed.'
,....:"
Columbus

At the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas in Columbus, Ohio, Courthouse News'
reporter has same-day access to new civil complaints after they have been date-stamped and
before processing. Courthouse News' reporter works at a desk behind the intake counter,
Complaints that are filed before the reporter arrives to the courthouse are placed in an "outbox"
tray where CNS's reporter is able to review them on the same day they are filed. Once the
reporter has finished reviewing those cases, a member of the court staff' retrieves complaints
that have been filed since the reporter's arrival directly from the various tellers and makes them
available for immediate review. Copies are available for a nominal fee.
At the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio in Columbus, all new
complaints are made available on PACER promptly upon filing. The court will also provide

Page]

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
1161147.lsor

,:

l,

Exhibit 2
Page 4]

ER 102

R
C'lW:11~CV-08083~ ~MAN Document 1"-'-Filed 09/29/11
..
I.

Page 44 of 62 Page 10 #:47

hard copies of any civil filings not available on PACER on a same-day basis, but the speed with
which cases are posted to PACER generaJly makes this unnecessary.

At the Dallas County District Court in Dallas, Texas, Courthouse News' reporter is provided
with behind-the-counter access to new petitions as SOOn they are filed and before any
as
docketing has taken place. The court provides the reporter with a place to work, where staffers

in the clerk's office provide him with access to the new petitions filed in paper form. As for efiled petitions, Courthouse News Service's reporter views some on a computer terminal in the
clerk's office. In many instances. however, petitions are not available on the terminal on a
same-day basis, and the clerk's office provides him with paper printouts of those petitions so
that he can see them same-day.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas has developed a process that
ensures reporters have same-day access to all new complaints, regardless of how far those
complaints have progressed through the intake process, On his daily afternoon visits to the
court. Courthouse News' reporter goes through a three-step process, described below, Leigh
Lyon, Assistant Chief Deputy of Operations, Dallas Division of the Northern District of Texas.
has informed us that she would be happy to speak with court officials in other jurisdictions
about this system. Ms. Lyon can be reached at (214) 753-2] 86.
•

First, Courthouse News' reporter checks a computer terminal in the clerk's office to
view summaries of the day's new complaints that have already been made available on
PACER. Courthouse News' reporter then' uses his own internet connection to
immediately download documents he needs to his laptop computer at the courthouse.

•

Second, Courthouse News' reporter checks for complaints that have been scanned by
the clerk's office, but are not yet available on PACER. These complaints have been
assigned a bar code and case number, and are made available for electronic viewing at a
public computer kiosk located in the clerk's office, where the media can then review the
new complaints on the same day they are filed.

•

Final ly, for complaints that are so new they have not yet been scanned, Courthouse
News' reporter views the paper versions ofthose new cases in their case folder and
maJces copies of newsworthy complaints .
........

:;

r.,

At the Wayne County Circuit Court, complaints are placed in a drawer in the intake area of the
clerk's office immediately after they are filed. Upon arriving at the clerk's office at
approximately 3 p.m., Courthouse News' reporter goes behind the counter and first doublechecks the previous day's complaints, which are located in bundled folders behind the intake
drawer, for any missed or last-minute filings
the day before. Then he turns to the intake
drawer, where he is permitted to review the newly filed complaints while standing behind the
counter. Most new complaints are in the drawer, but some are with the intake clerks, who will
share the complaints with the reporter for review. The reporter is permitted to make his own

from

Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
IJ62741vl

>or

Page 4

Exhibit 2
Page 42
ER 103

Cll(3r42:11-cv-0 8083- R - MAN 0 acumen t 1

F'lled 09/29/11

Page 45 of 62 Page 10 #:48

copies of complaints using a copier located also behind the counter. as well as an alternate
copier on the other side of the cashier station near the death certificates/marriage license area.
iJ

I

At the United States Distriot Court for the Eask:m District of Michigan, the court provides
copies, on a same-day basis, of all newly filed complaints in a media box located in a public
area, but only after the complaints have been fuJly docketed. Courthouse News' reporter can
either visit the courthouse to view complaints or he can view the new filings electronically on
PACER, which is just as timely as the hard copy press box.
Fort Worth

At the Tarrant County District Court in Fort Worth, most petitions appear on the court's on-line
system the day they are filed, except those cases that are filed electronically after 5:00 p.m.,
when the court is closed, which are made available the following day. Ifany petition that was
filed during court business hours is not available online the day it is filed. court staff either
make a copy for Courthouse News' reporter or arranges for the petition to be immediately
scanned and posted to the on-line access system. The end result is that Courthouse News'
reporter is able to access all petitions filed during court hours on the same day they are filed.
Houston
The Harris County Civil District Courts in Houston provided same-day access for many years
by permitting reporters to go behind the intaKe,wunters and review newly-filed petitions. In
2008, the clerk began requiring reporters
wait until new petitions had been processed and
posted on the clerk's web site before they could be reviewed, which delayed their availability
by a day or more - sometimes several days. After repeated attempts by Courthouse News to
negotiate a solution with the clerk's office failed to lead to a resolution, Courthouse News
reluctantly filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In July 2009, the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction ordering the clerk to provide sameday access to civil petitions, and finding that "the~24 to 72 hour delay in access is effectively a
denial of access and is, therefore, unconstitutional." Courthouse News Service v, Jackson, et
al., 2009 WL 2163609, at *4 (S.D. Tex. July 20. 2009). In accordance with that injunction
order, the clerk's office began scanning new petitions and posting them to the clerk's web site
the same day they are filed. Pursuant to a stipulated permanent injunction entered by the court
in March 201 0, the clerk's office became obligated not only to continue to provide same-day
access to new civil filings, but to pay more than $250.000 to Courthouse News to compensate it
for the attorneys fees it incurred in litigating the case. The stipulated permanent injunction did
not specify the particular manner in which same-day access musLbe provided, and the clerk's
office has chosen to comply with the order by continuing its practice of posting new petitions
on the clerk's web site. Those petitions can be viewed, and printouts can be made, free of
charge by the media and other interested parties on the day of filing. After that, petitions can
81iU be viewed without charge, but printouts can be made only ifthey have not been certified.
Once they are certified - which U$ua\1y occurs th.c day after filing - there is a fee to print out
copies of the petitions. Details abouttJiis program can be found on the Harris County District
Clerk's web site, at http://www.hcdistrictclerk.co)nfEdocsIPubhdsearch.aspK
(see button:
"Search Today'.!: Filings").

to

Media Access
§6T147

[0

Courts Around the Nation

Page 5

v I sa{

Exhibit 2

Page 43
ER 104

C,m52:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09129/11

Page 46 of 62

Page 10 #:49

At the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. where electronic filing is

req uired for new cases, Courthouse News' reporter can view electronic versions of complaints
that are already docketed and posted to PACER on the same day they are filed. For any new

complaint that has not yet been fully docketed, the Court will usually provide a hard copy
regardless of how far along the complaint is in the docketing process, also on the same day they
are filed.
.

.. Indbulapolis
,

I,

At the Marion County CirCUItand Superior Co~s in Indianapolis, Indiana, reporters view all
new filings on a same-day basis in the clerk's office. Reporters are given stacks ofthe new
filings, before they are processed or sent to the proper court division, and are allowed to go
through them at tables in the public viewing area from 4:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m, Reporters can
then make copies thernsel ves on court copy machines, which are then billed to Courthouse
News Service monthly,
At the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, reporters are provided
with access to all complaints filed on a same-day basis, even if docketing has not been
completed. When Courthouse News' reporter arrives at the end of the day, the court staff
gathers all of the civil cases filed throughout the day and allows the reporter to review the
complaints. The court staff will then make copies at a rate of 50 cents per page.
Las Vegas
At the Eighth Judicial District Court in Las Vegas, Nevada, reporters saw the majority of new

civil complaints on a same-day basis until the court switched to mandatory e-filing in February
2010. Following that switch, the court began requiring news reporters to review new
complaints at a computer termlnal in the clerk's office, but this system resulted in complaints
not being available for viewing nnti]:t~e day aft~ they were filed. The reason for these delays

was that new complaints did not appear on the computer terminals until after they had been
"accepted" by the clerk's office, and only after the terminals had been updated to reflect the
new filings. After Courthouse News brought these delays to the attention of the court, the court
adopted a new system: an electronic in-box, through which complaints can be viewed on a
computer terminal as soon as they cross the electronic version of the intake counter at the
clerk's office, even if they have not yet been fully processed. Through this system, which is
similar to the electronic in-box access procedures in place at numerous federal district courts
(many of which are described in this survey), Courthouse News is now seeing new e-filed
complaints on a same-day basis.
At the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Courthouse News' reporter can
view electronic versions of the majority of new complaints on a same-day basis on PACER.
Complaints that are not made available on the day they are filed are usually made available on
the following day.

Media Access [0 Courts Around the Nation"
'62747 vr sar

Page 6
•

.~ f

Exhibit 2
Page 44
ER 105

.Ctl(J62:11-cv-oa083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 47 of 62 Page 10 #:50

Los Angeles
At the Downtown (Stanley Mosk Courthouse) branch of the Superior COW1 of California in Los
Angeles, reporters can review all new actions that are filed on a particular day through the
court's computer system, which includes terminals for the general public and additional
terminals in a designated press room. Both the filing room - including the intake and
processing areas - and the area in which the general public view cases close at 4:30 p.m .• but
the press room remains open later and even the latest filings of the day are available and can be
revi ewed by 7;00 p.m, A bout 90 new civil, general jurisdiction cases are filed each day.
At the Santa Monica Courthouse of the same court, face pages of each day's newly-filed
complaints are made available for review at 3:30 p.m, on the same day the complaints are filed.
Courthouse News' reporter then-requests copiesof those complaints for which she wants to see
the full-text versions. The full text of'late-filed 'COmplaints is made available at 4:30 p.m.,
when the filing room court closes its doors to the public but where the courthouse employees
continue to work until 5;00 p.m. Courthouse News' reporter can then request copies of any of
those late-filed complaints, and they are generally provided right away.
At the United States District Court for the Central District of California, a room is set up
directly off the docketing department with a set of pass-through boxes. At 4 :45 p.m., a
messenger places all of the civil complaints filed that day in the pass-through boxes so that the
media can review them. Inside the reviewing room is a copy machine maintained by the press.
Reporters that cover the courthouse 01) adaily basis have a key to the room. which is otherwise
locked, and they can stay as long as they want to look over the complaints and rulings, copy
those of interest, and put the documents back in the pass-through boxes.
Louisville
At the Jefferson County Circuit Court in Louisville, Kentucky, the clerk's staff makes a copy of
the front page of all complaints filed throughout the day and places the coversheets on a tabJe
in the public area of the office. Courthouse News' reporter then reviews the stack of
coversheets and requests any complaints he determines to be newsworthy on the same day they
are filed. The clerk's office will make copies for him at a rate of25 cents per page.

.. <
The United States District Court for th~;WeStem District of Kentucky in Louisville has adopted
an e-filing system requiring initiating documents'to be filed electronically. The court has
provided the media with an "MC" case number code. Using this code at a designated computer
terminal in the clerk's office, reporters can review newly filed complaints in exactly the same
format as they are received in the clerk's office, prior to being docketed and before they are
available to the public on PACER. If a reporter needs a copy of a complaint, he requests the
copy from court staff at a rate of 50 cents per page.

ManhaMan
At the New York County Supreme Court, where certain case types are required to be e-filed,
new complaints are made available to reporters on the same day they are filed, whether they are
filed in paper or electronic form. E-filed cases are posted online to a court website by the end
Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
J~141 vi

s.r

Page 7

Exhibit 2
Page 45
ER 106

C,tJf2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 48 of 62 Page ID #:51

of the day they are filed, While new complaints filed in paper form an: indexed and scanned
shortly after being filed, and made available electronically via an internal computer system on
terminals set up throughout the courthouse. At 4:00 p.m., and then at regular intervals until
5:00 p.m., the paper versions of the new complaints are then placed by court officials in a
secure area behind the counter where reporters are free to review them on a same-day basis.
At the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, reporters are
permitted to view new civil complaints three times a day - between 9:00 a.rn, and 9:45 a.m.,

between I I :30 a.m. and 12: 15 p.m., and between 3:35 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. - on the same day the
complaints are filed.

In Miami-Dade County Circuit Court, the clerk's office closes to the general public at 4 p.m.,
but security personnel remain until 6:45 p.m., allowing Courthouse News Service's reporter to
review new filings. The reporter is permitted to go behind the intake counter and pull same day
complaints directly from each intake clerks' desk from 4:45 p.m. until the office closes at 6:45
p.m. The complaints that Courthouse News' reporter reviews have been assigned a case
number and checked for all required documentation and payment, but have not been entered
into the court's computer system .. If the reporter needs copies she is able to make her own
copies at a Court copy machine-for $1 per page.

At the United States District Court fOT the Southern District-of Florida, electronic filing of new
civil complaints is mandatory, and new complaints that are filed before 5 p.m. appear on
PACER on the same day they are filed. Cases filed after 5 p.m. appear on PACER the
fbllowing

day.

.
Milwaukee

At the Milwaukee County Court in Wisconsin, reporters have access to new complaints on the
day they are filed, even if they have not yet been'fully processed, and are permitted to go
behind the counter. Reporters can request copies of complaints from court personnel for a
small fee.
.
At the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, most new complaints
are e-filed and available electronically through PACER on the same day they are filed.
However, for those cases that are not immediately posted to PACER, court staff provides
reporters with the original paper versions of the new complaints, also on the same day they are
filed. Reporters are then able to make copies at a copy machine for a nominal fee.
.
.

MioaeaDol&!st

Palll

At both the Hennepin County District Court in Minneapolis and the Ramsey County DistrictCourt in St Paul, where many ofthe new complaints are filed by mail, Courthouse News'
reporter is permitted to go behind the counter to review the stack of original complaints on the
same day they are filed and before they are docketed. Because the reporter visits Ramsey
County only three times per week, she is unable to review all cases on the same day they are
Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
N621H

_I sof

Page 8

Exhibit 2
Page 46

ER 107

c~~:

11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 49 of 62 Page 10 #:52

filed, but is able to search for and view the cases she has missed on a computer terminal at the
courthouse the next time she visits the court. The reporter is able to make her own copies in
Hennepin County, where Courthouse News bas established a copy account. In Ramsey
County, for cases the reporter reviews on the day offiJing, the court staff will make copies of
any complaint the reporter requests, For eases.she reviews after the day offiling, the reporter is
able to print a copy directly from thecomputerterminal.
At the United States District Court for District of Minnesota, reporters begin their visit by using
a computer terminal at the courthouse to view an intake log of new cases. From there, reporters
review complaints available on PACER using a public computer terminal in the clerk's office.
If a complaint shown on the intake log of new cases is not yet available on PACER, the court
wiIl print out a copy for the reporter. The Clerk charges 10 cents per page for any copies that
reporters request.
Nashville

At the Davidson County Chancery Court in Nashville, Courthouse News' reporter reviews an
intake log ofthe day's new filings on a public computer terminal at the courthouse. She then
compiles a Jist of the relevant cases and presents the list to the court staff, who retrieve the
requested cases and allow her to review the complaints regardless of whether the docketing
process has been completed.
At the Davidson County Circuit Court, most new complaints are scanned throughout the day
and are made available through a government website on the same day they are filed.
At the United States District Court ~rthe Middle District of Tennessee, the clerk's staff are
required to stay one hour after closing lit order t~ scan all new filings and post them onto
PACER on the day they are filed.
Oakland
Although the Alameda County Superior Court in Oakland, California, endeavors to make
newly-filed complaints available for viewing on its web site on a same-day basis, it has
implemented procedures to ensure that news reporters who visit the Rene C. Davidson
courthouse can obtain same-day access to those complaints that would otherwise not be posted
for electronic viewing on a same-day basis. Under those procedures, reporters are provided
with access to a workstation behind the intake counter. The station is equipped with a
computer connected to the Internet. Courthouse News' reporter first reviews the cases that are
made available online. For those cases that are not available online by the end of the work day
but are of media interest, court staffers scan and make those cases available on their web site.
City

Oklahoma

At the Oklahoma County Court, intake clerks place all of the day's new petitions into a central
basket by 3: 15 p.m. Petitions placed in the basket have been date stamped, but have not been
fully docketed - only indexed. A member of th~ clerk 's staff then provides the petitions to
Courthouse News' reporter, and the reporter.is instructed to sign the back of each petition to
•

Media Access to Courts Around tile Nation
162747 ~l

,.r

!

1

Page 9

Exhibit 2
Page 47

C~:11-cv-08083-R

.

-MAN Document 1

Filed 09J29/11

Page 50 of 62 Page ID #:53

'

ensure that she has seen them all, After she has completed her review of the petitions in the
basket, Courthouse News' reporter is permitted to review any further petitions that have been
filed, indexed and placed in the basket after J: 15 p.m. The reporter may request copies of
petitions at a rate oUI.OO for the first page and 50 cents for all subsequent pages.
Omaha
At the Douglas County District Court, new complaints are filed in paper form and then added
to an internal computer database that is updated live when a new case is received and indexed.
Courthouse News' reporter reviews the index information for relevant cases on a courthouse
computer terminal and a filing c1er~re~eves'·th;e complaints he requests before they have been
fully processed or scanned. Courthouse News'treporter ean review the new complaints on the
day offiling in the public area ofthe clerk's office and is free to make copies on public
machines.
Orlando

At the Ninth judicial Circuit Court, Courthouse News' reporter reviews hard copies of newly

filed complaints at a designated desk behind the counter. The staff places new complaints that
have not undergone any processing (i.e., docketed, jacketed or assigned a case number) near the
reporter's desk each day for same-day viewing. Since some complaints have been docketed by

the time Courthouse News' reporter arrives. these complaints are placed in a separate pile for
review before they are moved to a separate desk for scanning by 4 p.m. In
addition, Courthouse News' reporter is permitted to review e-filed complaints and complaints
that have been docketed and scanned by the time the reporter arrives on a same-day basis using
one of the Clerk's terminals located beh ind the counter.
the reporter's

At the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida in Orlando, where
electronic filing is mandatory, the court posts the majority of new civil filings to PACER on the
same day they are filed.
:;Palni !Jeacb
,..

r'

In the Palm Beach County Circuit Court, members of the press review new civil cases at the
intake counter at 4 p.m. on the day they are filed. The new cases are given to the press as a
stack offolders.
Phoenix

At the Maricopa County Superior Court in Phoenix, Arizona, court staff recently implemented
new procedures to ensure sarne-day access to civil complaints fi led at its downtown location.
Under the new procedures, court staff scan and upload for electronic viewing all complaints
filed before 3 p.rn., which are then made available on a designated press computer located in
the Customer Service Center for Courthouse News' reporter to review and, if necessary, print.
Complaints filed between 3 and 5 p.m. are immediately placed in a bin at a designated intake
window in the Central Court Building, where Courthouse News' reporter may review those
complaints between 4 and 5 p.m.
Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
M62747 vI

s.r

Page 10

Exhibit 2
Page 48

ER 109

Cp,~2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 1 " ~iled 09/29/11
. ~~.
~ .,

Page 51 of 62 Page ID #:54

;

Pittsburgh
At the AlJegheny County Court of Common Pleas in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where the Court
has implemented an internally operated electronic filing system, nearly all ofthe day's new
filings are available on-line on a same-day basis. Complaints not posted to the court's website
on the day of filing are made available the following day.
In the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, where electronic
filing is mandatory, Courthouse News' reporter has been provided with an "Me" case number
code for PACER that allows her to view the new filings before they are docketed.
Portland
At the Multnomah County Court in Portland, Courthouse News' reporter is given a stack of the
current day's newly filed complaints, which she reviews at a cubicle behind the counter. The
reporter can make any needed copies herself uslftg her own portable scanner.
At [he United States District Court for the District of Oregon, Courthouse News' reporter first
searches for newly filed complaints through the court's "electronic in-box," which is available
on a public access terminal at the courthouse and contains those complaints that the clerks have
scanned but not yet processed and posted to PACER. Site then searches for processed
complaints on PACER. which are also available at a public access terminal at the courthouse.
Finally, the clerks give Courthouse News' reporter paper copies of those complaints that have
not yet been scanned and posted either to the electronic in-box or to PACER. The clerks will
also review the court's record book with Courthouse News' reporter at the end of the day to
malce sure that no filings have been missed.
Riveqide
At the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Riverside, new complaints are
scanned and made available for electronic viewing via the Court's web site and at computer
terminals in the courthouse. The press had been experiencing delays in access for years until a
new clerk, formerly from the United States District Court for the Central District of California,
came on board. The clerk found that same-day access could be achieved simply by shifting the
schedules of the personnel who scan complaints so that they begin and end work later in the
day, thus ensuring that new complaints would be made available for electronic viewing on a
same-day basis.
"
j
Sf. Louis
At the S1. Louis City Circuit Court in Missouri, Courthouse News' reporter goes to the intake
window where cases are filed and clerk's office staff members hand the reporter a stack of new
cases filed that same day. Courthouse News' reporter works at the counter next to the intake
window; however, members of the media can also work at a table near the window. Staff
members in the clerk's office will provide members of the media with copies of newsworthy
new cases free of charge.
Media Access to Courts Around the NaIi<;1Il
r~ZJ41 vl .. r

Page II

Exhibit 2
Page 49

ER 110

·C~$12:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 52 of 62 Page 10 #:55

At the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. where new complaints
must be electronically filed, each case is assigned a case number upon filing by the attorney
and is immediately made available on PACER; even ifit has not been fully reviewed and
processed. Courthouse News' reporter is able to view the new complaints on a computer
terminal in the clerk's office and print out copies for a small fee.
San Francisco

At the Superior CoUJ1of Calif ami a for the County of San Francisco, news reporters are allowed
behind the counter into the stacks to review unlimited numbers of new filings after providing a
dri ver' s license and filling out a temporary name tag. The number of new filings per day
varies, but often exceeds 50. Courthouse News views new complaints regardless of whether
they have been fully processed. San Francisco Superior has established a written protocol for
members of the press. The key provisions are quoted below:
If media personnel want to review files already on the shelves, they can pull
these files themsel Yes and return them to the shelves.
All new filings wiJl be held in a Media Box during the day. Between 3:00 and
4:30 each day, this box will .be available to the media for viewing in the Records
department, whether or not 'the cases have been entered in the computer. At
4:00 PM, when the office closes'to' the'pllblic. media personnel may ask to view
any additional filings that may have come in since 3:00 PM. The Records
supervisor or an assigned clerk will retrieve those files for the media to view.
Any member of the media viewing new filings must return them to the box for
eventual return to the Records supervisor or assigned clerk.
Media personnel may come in anytime before 3:00 PM to view new filings.
However, they will only be viewing cases newly filed up until that time.
Copy machine from the second floor Media Room will be moved to Room 103
and located behind the Records department This machine belongs to
Courthouse News Service, but has been made available to all media personnel
for their use.
'
At the San Francisco Division of the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, reporters go behind the counter and review actions filed that same day. regardless of
whether the complaints have been fully docketed or posted on PACER. They are also
permitted access to the so-called "transfer boxes" of new actions being sent to different
divisions of the court, and are provided with a copy of the intake log. Reporters are permitted
to make copies of cases they determine to be n.~wsworthy using a portable scanner,
!-,'

.San .iose

At the Santa Clara County Superior Court in San Jose, California, the Court recently
implemented new procedures to ensure that reporters receive same-day access to the vast
Media Access to Courts Around the Nation
N62147 vi

aaf

Page [2

Exhibit 2

Page 50
ER 111

Cc1~:

11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document

1

Filed 09129/11

Page 53 of 62

Page 10 #:56

majority of each day's new civil unlimited jurisdiction complaints. Under those procedures,
civil unlimited complaints are made available to Courthouse News' reporter upon receipt of the
filing fee. the assignment ofa case number, and the assignment ofa flrst status conference date.
even though processing of the new complaint is far from over at this juncture. Complaints that
are filed over the counter by 3:30 p.m. are made available to Courthouse News' reporter on the
same day they are filed. All unlimited jurisdiction complaints that are in the drop box by 4 :00
p.rn. are also made available to Courthouse News on the same day they are filed. Unlimited
jurisdiction complaints that are filed over the counter between 3:30 p.m. and the cleric's office
closing at 4:00 p.m. have been designated as
priority. and the court endeavors to make
them available for review onthe same day they are filed. Courthouse News' reporter is
permitted to remain at the court WItiI 4:30 p.m .• one half-hour after closing. to review late-filed
cases. The court makes copies of complaints as requested by the reporter.

a staff

At the San Jose Division of the United States District Court for tbe Northern District of
California, clerks print out a Jist of all new complaints filed earlier that day. Reporters go
behind the counter, obtain complaints from individual clerks' desks. report on and scan any
newsworthy complaints, and then return the complaints to the clerks' desks.

At the King County Superior Court, Courthouse News' reporter is provided with a docket sheet
print-out of new cases two times per day-once at l l a.m, and again at 3 p.rn. The] I a.m.Iist
includes al1 cases that have been filed from 3 p.rn on the previous day through II a.m. on the
current day. while the 3 p.m, Jist includes new cases that have been filed from 11 a.m, to 3 p.rn,
that day. The reporter reviews each list to find relevant cases, then searches for and views new
complaints on a computer terminal at the courthouse. She is able to print out relevant
complaints for 15 cents per page.
l

•

T~m.'pa
,.
=,

At the Hillsborough County Circuit Court. new complaints that are hand-filed in the main
courthouse are made available for review by reporters at the end of the day they are filed. Most
complaints are scanned by court staff and made available on the court's public access terminals
for review. Those complaints that are not scanned and available on the public access terminals
by 4 p.m. are provided in paper form for news reporters, who have until the court closes at 5
p.m. to review those late-filed complaints.

Media Access to Courts Around the Natiol1'~'
I/W47

vI saf

Page I]

Exhibit 2
Page 51

ER 112

CG1$32:11-cv-08083-R -MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 54 of 62 Page ID #:57

EXIDBIT3

ER 113

C~sr~: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document

1

Filed

09/29/11

Page

55 of 62 Page 10 #:58

Supmor Court 0/ Ca/;fom;a
COUNTY OF VENTURA

Hall of Justice
800 South VIctoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009

Michael D. Planet
Executive OfficerlClerk
and Jury Commissioner

July 11, 2011
Rachel Matteo-Boehm
Holme Roberts and Owen llP
560 Mission Street, 25th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Re: Media Access to New Complaints
Dear Ms. Matteo-Boehm:
I am writing in response to your June 20, 2011 letter regarding
complaints at the Ventura Superior Court.

media

access to new

As you have noted, the Court has met and spoken with you and representatives of Courthouse
News Service several times over the past couple of years to both explain the Court's serious
resource shortages as a result of budget reductions, and steps that could reasonably be taken
to make new complaints available to the media,
The budget recently signed by the Governor
imposes even more drastic reductions to the Courts, which makes it even more difficult to
provide same-day access to new filings. .
'
While I appreciate the Courthouse News Services' interest in same-day access, the Court
cannot prioritize that access above other priorities and mandates,
Further, the Court must
ensure the integrity of all filings, in.eluding new filings, and· cannot make any filings available
until the requisite processing is completed. We will continue to make every effort to make new
filings available as early as is practicable given the demands on.limited court resources.

&~~UHr
Michael D. Planet
Executive Officer
MDP/vjb

MailingAddress:

p,o, Box 6489, Ventura. California 93006-6489

Exhibit 3
Page 52

ER 114

C~sr52:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page 56 of 62 Page 10 #:59

EXHmIT4

ER 115

CfJI~:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN. Document 1

Filed 09f29/11

Page 57 of 62 Page,ID #:60

Holme Roberts & Owen LLP
AUomeyr atfmg

SAN FRANCISCO

BOUlDER

August 2, 20 I ]
Michael Planet
Court Executive Officer
Ventura County Superior Court
800 South Victoria Ave.
Ventura, CA 93009
Re:

Media Access 10New Complaints

COlORADO SPRINGS

Dear Mr. Planet:

DENVER

DUBLIN

LONDON

On behalf of Courthouse News Service, we write to briefly respond to your assertion, in
your July 11, 2011 letter, that budgetary difficulties prevent the Ventura County Superior
Court from providing the media with timely, same-day access to newly-filed civil
unlimited jurisdiction complaints.
Respectfully, our experience working with other courts shows that providing prompt media
access to new civil complaints - fundamentally. the simple act of letting reporters see the
new complaints that, because they are newly-filed. are already centrally located in the
intake area - need not involve any extra expense or staff time beyond the de minimis effort
of handing a stack of complaints to a reporter (and even that de minimis effort can be
eliminated if a credentialed reporter is simply allowed 10 go behind the'counter to pick up
the slack, as reporters do at the federal district court in San Francisco, for example).
Indeed, it has been our experience that providing prompt access is largely a matter of will
on the part of the court and its leaders.

lOS ANGELES

SALT LAKE CITY

For example, at the San Francisco Superior Court and Santa Clara County Superior Court,
new filings are placed in a media box, available to news reporters for viewing whether or
not those complaints have been fully docketed. In the past, in San Francisco, reporters
gathered the complaints from the intake window and put them in the box, actually saving
Some work for the court. Courthouse News has also observed that the de minimis staff
effort required to administer this type of"rcvicw box" is much less than the substantial
effort involved when staff are required to track down fully processed complaints for press
review, as is currently the case in Ventura County. State courts in Alameda, Los Angeles
and Riverside also provide same day access to the press. AU four federal courts in
California provide the media with same-day access to new civil complaints without undue
expenditures of staff time or expense.

Racllel MaUeo-Boehm 415.268.1996 rathel.matteo·[e-mail]
560 Mission Street, 251h Floof San Francisco, CaDromia 94105-2994 tel 415.268,2000

fclx 415.268.1999
H6~169 _I saf

Exhibit 4
Page 53

ER 116

· C8f3f1:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Documentj

filed 09/29/11

Page 58 of 62 Page 10 #:61

HoJme Roberts & Owen UP
AaDme)"S

crt Lalli

Michael Planet
August 2, 20 II
Page 2
At bottom, press access only results in increased costs where the court imposes the
requirement of complete processing before providing access. But newly filed complaints
become public records upon filing, and this status is not contingent on the court having
first completed processing. We must therefore respectfully but firmly disagree with your
assertion that providing timely access can only be accomplished at a monetary cost to the
Court.

Sincerely,

1~~~
Rachel Matteo-Boehm

cc:

The Honorable Vincent O'Neill, Jr., Presiding Judge
Courthouse News Service

"

~64169.1

s.r

Exhibit 4
Page 54
ER 117

C~~:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

Page590f62

Page 10#:62

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE

JUDGE FOR DISCOVERY

This case has been assigned to District Judge Manuel Real and the assigned discovery
Magistrate Judge is Margaret A_ Nagle.
The case number on all documents filed with the Court should read as follows:

CV11- 8083 R

(MARx)

Pursuant to General Order 05-07 of the United States District Court for the Central
District of California, the Magistrate Judge has been designated to hear discovery related
motions.

Unless otherwise ordered. the United States District Jlldge assigned to this case will
bear and detennine all discovery related motions.

====~===========~===~=~========~~=~===~.
NOIICE TO COUNSEL

A copy of this notice must be Bwved with the summons and complaint on
8 COJTY of Ihi8 notice musl be served an ali pIa/tIIIIfsJ.

af/ defendants

(If a r8mtJ11alaClion I.

flsd,

Subsequent documents must be filed at the following location:

[Xl

Westem Division
312 N. Spring St., Rm. G-8
Los Angeles, CA 90012

U

Southlm DIviSion
411 West Fourth St, Rm.1-053
Santa Ana, CA 1270104516

U

ealbm Dll/lSlon
3470 Twelfth Sl, Rm.134
Rlvandde, CA 82501

Failul8lo file altha pnlpeI'location willresuilln: JOIIrdocuments being returned to you.

CV·18 (03ID6)

NOTICE. OF ASSIGNMENT

TO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE

JUDGE FOR DISCOVERY

ER 118

00/00/2 1

16:10:21 FAX [phone]

NATIONWIDELEGAL

1

ORIGINAL
Name &: Address:

Rachel MaUeo~Boehm(SBN 195492) .
OavidGreene (SBN 1601rJ
Leila C. Knox ~BN 245999
Holme Roberts &. Owen LL
S60 Mission Streec, 25th Floor

San Francisco.CA 94105·2994
~:41S1268-2000;Fax:41S126S-1999
UNITED STATES DISTRJCf COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNrA
CASENUMBEK

COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE.
PLAINTIff(S)

v

•

MICHAEl. PLANET. in his official capacily as
Court Executive Officer/Clerk of the Venmra

Caunty Superior Coun,

SUMMONS
DEfENDAN1'(S).

TO:

DEFENDANT(S): Michael Planet, In his official capaelty as Court Excwtive Officer/Clerk of'tbe
Ventura CoUltty Superior Court

A lawsuit has been filed agalnsl YOli.
Within"!!"",,, days after service of this IIWnmon. an you (not counllns &heday YOII recolved It). you
mUll serve on the plaintiffan answer to the attached III complaint 0
s.mende' conaplalat
CIcounterclaIm 0 cross-claim or GIllotion under Rule 12urtlle Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 11te IlDSWer
or motion mUSI be served on fhe plalntlfl's attorney. Rachel Matteo~Boehm
• whose address is
Holme Roberts" Owen LlP. 560 Mission St.. 2Sth FI.. San Francisco. CA 94105·2994 • ((you filii to do so.
judamcnt by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the IXImplaint. You atso must tile
your answer or motion wilh the c:ourt.
.
Clerk, U_S. District Caurt

SEP 29 2011
Dated: __

-

_

JIM 6fJt/ayI ifl. thfondonr tulle UnHed StalllS or a UniktJ StaIU .11110/. or is 1m tdJl«r or employee ofrhll United Stale&. AI,_.d
4tJdap by Rult 12(tJ)(J)).

CV-QIJ\ "2107)

SI'IIIMONS

ER 119

~~&ro'1 :1-r:v-OHOR~-R-MAN

oO/oOno~16:ro:21

rn:k'2I3~49~990

I (a) PlJ.IIfTlFFS

(CfIodc -.

ir)'Gll.-e re~liq"

Document 1

Filed 09/29/11

NATIONWIDE

,'lItIlHlfCb

OEFEfUW(1S

Oftlcerofdu:

Ntmt.

1

MJCHA!L PLANET. in hit ofl"lClll capacity

Coanhouse News Service

(b) AaIIne)os(FiIlll

Page 61 of 62 Page ID #:64

Lg(;AL

AtIdno; ImITclephGne

)'0-" pnMdI-.)

HIuIIta'.Ir,....IIC

IIptalClllilll

IS CourIIiJceeuU\'e

Vanilla CcnmI)o Superior Court

AIKImIl1S prICIIIIWII)

Raebe! UdeIJ-Boehm; DlilYfd GrccItc. Lelia KnOlc
HOLME ROBERTS &. OWEN Ll.P
.56D Mission Stn!et,:zsdo Floor
SUI FI'IacIsco, Col. 9410S-l994
41S.U8-lDOO
UL cmzENSRIP OJ!PRINCIPAL rAlrfIES- FGr lmcrsiltCUt:s
(PI__
X iIIonc.lIox rtrjl!.illdfl'lIIId_IbrClaftllillftt)

o I U.S. Oowcmmcnll'll1llllilr

o 2V.S.

I2!J J I'cdmJ Q.le$I'bll(U.S.

""

a,.ly

PTF DEJI'

DI.F

1m10.

c.'l1lWJmle1lt Detc.dlnl

04

N;,.1'atI)I

DiYmIly (1ftdbIe C~Qel'4tljp Ciliten
orPanlc:r: lit hem 18)

ar~

0

SIIIe

Otir~DGISulP"Gr.FnlpcDIIIIi7

l

.n=palllll!d Ilf Prihclpal PlIed

0:2

OJ 03

0"

.~irllbbSW.

o.w.lllftIIIIl

as 0 J

IaaIIPDIdd IIICf PrinciJIIII place
UlhllblaalbAnokSlltt

n,

FmMrrNalian

1:514

0'

lV. ORIGIN (PI-1Q1 X inane .. DnIy.)

Ia I Olilllllli

I'nIcmIDt

021.emo\d.1tosn
03
SWe'OlUII

Appdllll:

V.UQUUTtlUPlCOMPlAllff:.MlY
CLASS Acnottll11d1t- r.R.CP. UI

0 va

VI. CAllIE 011' IaCTIONfCIIt;cheU.

RaIIded fIaIn

s. Civ

Coun

D: 0

0"

RaillllaMd ar [],

06

n.f\Ind rnra uothlt illifIric:I(lpcd~)~

~

'AsH~(Qcd;·YCll'oal,j(""'III;mp!IItrr.)

No
.sIllUle IIICICI'wbldI yourelilina

,Jntantl FOIIrtef!nth AmandDIIIIIIs 10 ClIe Unleed hila ColIIlIlldiaa

0 MOItEV

DIMAoMIED IN COM.L.\INTr

IIIIIWlillabrief_arCdIlle.

S

MulIi0 '1AjIpeIllCI DIftict
DiIIria
W(e &am
lilipll!!l
NM__ Jude

in'unction

DlllI6lCbtjuIlsdlcIhrnal

M!lnrtellllftl~ d~.)

and Ci.,.O Rf;,hlll Act· 42 U.S.c. Sec. 1913
PRlSOJIBa

pmnONS
510 MoIIoa& to \>I
SIIlIIftCt ......
Ctrptll

5JOChNrlI

WOMth"''Y
J40MiMll!IIIII

O!/Itt
Ii) CMJ

II/aIIII

59,.,. c.dItIen

POIUIII1'1JI8I
PllNALtY
IIUpllllhure
620McrftradA
Dq

.2JlmlmIcC
SIlianui'
PI'epeRy 21 USC
.11
.
6lD~~LcM

6tDII.R.41nldC

6SOAbibI

Rep

NO Ckcup&1iPII

SIl.l:l1Mc111111
MOOftr

CV-71 (OJlOl)

Ptp:laf2

ER 120

·"·J·L"

?

~U;J.U;.t:,

NATIONWIDE

'''IIA "J..:.I"4~!;l991l

C~@12;11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 1

LEG~

Filed 09/29111

lJNf1'ED STATES DISTRICf COURT. CENTRAL DlSTRIcr
OVIL COYER stIEE1'
VlIRI). mENTIcu
lI'ya,llsJease~{I):

CASES:J H-. I/IisaclfonbcctllR\'lulldJ'
-

"mew. RlIATEDCASDHaveIlll)'CllBIIeeI!

filed IlIdll, _rt -'

~

QIIIIIIIIe;j

ID#65
:

2

OF CALI'FORNlA

181N~ 0

or c~

181HoD

pf!YloUiIy lliedilld!ii cault~_Idatc4'~lIzepr=NGISI:?

",...Hn_lIDIJJ\It:J(sJ!

Page 62 of 62 Page

Yes

_

Yas

-

ariJ casa Irc deelDld "JIlted Itllllm'lolll)'
IUd nH 1II1II1fIe'P"ftllS caw.
•
(J A. Arlee ...... 1IIeur=orctose"rdIIcIJ u.... ajQDs,.IIappea. ar _IS; 01
Oa.OIIrot~oru..IIIm'1II'5~lJlduSarJilllillll'.utrivlllllnlWlIlIrlCC;ur
c.
ftISIllIJ1'III1IIcI mflllllObllllldlif dupIlRliun.,
ifIaJd ., difTcRrJcJqlaes; II,
D.1mo$n dIG_
fIIICnL '"*'-kOf~r._
orlllellaQn Idcnlilld lIIorIe lu, borG also & p!CSe"I1l.

(CII;fA: all boM:I 1'-1.,.",.)

o Fa,.,.

o

l.o5 Angclt$ County

LI~. 'he COIIQ!YIn dIi$ Dlrlrict C.lllOnJI.CoanIy 0IIIIkI, oflhis DitIrioi;SIIII~ Ifalhcrthal!
III
... 0
iSIIIIlIIICdddcndllrrLlrlllisllox1l

~

CGUD"· 1ft Ibis ~:.

tWIn.

c.llfomIII; Of Pom", CellllIY,la wIIldJ E4CH RIIITd~

ti..Q!.,=,khcf~ifll"

Illile (~

ClllramIlClIUIIl1alllliclrofIlll$DiS1rirl;$l!e.ird'Cf_CIIiftmll;

III'F~O!IItIIJy

Venturn Counl)'
• Ltu"~~~ln.Oorlll:f."It8e~,IUvIl'll"
l;n!'I.~~!'.'.!JIIDIiIlll~
_l1li1__

~'!

'1- SJDN"·~I;RJ: U!' AlTORNEY (OK PRO~;

or

V

"-fA~-+:~.....-Ic=--=,~-¥-:.~_=-

__

D.lr

2;r±. lS~1'ZO I f

Nok fit CIl1l_~
11KCV·71(JS-44)CIviI CCWa"SttccI and !lie IIII'iIIIIlaIia eGIIlllncdhanci1lrl:rRP!* IICII" supplarrlillllhr 0l1li1 AIIIImvicnfpltldinp
or Dllon I'~
IIS.CIIIind II)' law. 'ibis bm, jIJIpIVRd ~ !he JudidII OIIII'm;m;I: 111'& Unlta bIa: ill Septcmhr I P74. iJ ~kcII ~
10LIIQI1 blc 3 .. illnallllld
II1IIiI ;Mil by Ibe aerie I/flhe Caunfor-h PlllpOiliufJlllillias,.
IIIIIIlIrbiltilwlhc cRJllocbulrccL (For _ddlrikd
insInII:dans.sccSlJllUill; ilsIrIJcCianI skct.)

_Ie

K~ III SIIIIISI,.,.,t
~d" "' ...

10 SociIJ s-i1)' Cases;

Nama .rSNII Cotlt

"1I~1Ioil

Srtlrlll ....

'61

ItJII

AI dlims fOJ heahbilllllUJllte .. fa (Mcdif.In:) uader TilJR II.
A, lin... Sacill ~
A~ ra; IIIIIa'Idcd.
lndura !:Willi'" ha!piIak. Jl:!Ufd Jlllllini kiJilies, CII:~ r:cnilIc:adoIt III pnlVllIm of smiCCI UIdcr lire

""so.

proJ""'-

(4Z

S.. Rnrad erCII1H-6f~"'"

u.s.c.

rar

'WI

t9lSfP(\I))

161

8L.

"" dalmf fill" "8I11ckLulli" bcnditllWlllprTIll94.1'1R
(~OU.s.c.!1»..
. !! ;

B.lIfflc federal Cod Milt: Hc:allh udSlItIy

116)

DIWC

AU t:Jafms fildr'",i~worWJ
fill' diabilrty illillllllllCCkndIrsa. Tille 1 orille Jolla! ~
runcn4J11;,u III cit/lID fib! rlll'.cflild'J ~ilClldits
bIued_ dinltifisy. (410.s.c. 4tfW)

'W

DIWW

"'"111_ filed for wilklwl OfWidlnlm ~

164

SSID

bclltlbs1lll=d

l1li

AcI,r I'M.
"'''. IS

disUiliIy uncklliU; 2 ofdte Socii! Sccurily

Act, as 1II1IftIdI:d. (42 U.S.C. 4OS{e)J

All dmu for su,.lerromW=urity

Inc:aIK JI"rIft*IIIS
Nscd IIJIIII' di5abilhyDluIlIII4cr Trtle 160f.

SodI1 Stcurity

Acc.IIII-...L
10"

RST

AI claims rDl miterMIIt (old av-)anI suMVOfS bmdirs U3ldlfTit!e Z orlill SociaJSteum,.

Act, IS ~.141

U.s.C.g»
CV .71 (OSII)I)

Ctvo. COVER

SHEET

ER 121

CMJECF - California Central District

Page 10f6

122
(MANx), APPEAL, CLOSED, DISCOVERY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
(Western Division - Los Angeles)
CNIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:11-cv-08083-R -MAN

Courthouse News Service v. Michael Planet
Assigned to: Judge Manuel L. Real
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Margaret A. Nagle
Case in other court: 9th eCA, 11-57187
Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

Date Filed: 09/29/2011
Date Terminated: 11130/2011
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
Courthouse

News Service

represented by David Allen Greene
Bryan Cave LLP
560 Mission Street Suite 250
San Francisco, CA 94105-2994·
415-268-2000
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Leila Christine Knox
Bryan Cave LLP
560 Mission Street Suite 250
San Francisco, CA 94105-2994
415-268-2000
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Rachel E Matteo-Boehm
Bryan Cave LLP
560 Mission Street Suite 250
San Francisco, CA 94105-2994
415-268-2000
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

v.
Defendant
Michael Planet
in his official capacity as Court
Executive Officer/Clerk of the Ventura

represented by Robert A Naeve
Jones Day
3161 Michelson Drive Suite 800

ER 122
https:/lecfcacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-binIDktRpt.

pl ?578713661642325- L_452_0-1

5/18/2012

CMlECF - California Central District

Page Z of6

123

County Superior Court

Irvine, CA 92612
949-851-3939
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Erica Lynn Reilley
Jones Day
555 South Flower Street 50th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
2 13-489~3939
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed

#

Docket Text

09/29/2011

1

COMPLAINT against Defendant Michael Planet. Case assigned to Judge
Manuel L. Real for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate
Judge Margaret A. NagIe.(Filing fee $ 350 Paid.), filed by Plaintiff Courthouse
News Service. (et) (amar). (Entered: 09/29/2011)

09/29/2011

21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery)
Michael Planet. (et) (Entered: 0912912011)

1as to Defendant

0912912011

2

NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service,
identifying Other Affiliate William Girdner, President, Courthouse News
Service for Courthouse News Service. (et) (amar). (Entered: 09129/2011)

09129/2011

.2.

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by
Plaintiff Courthouse News Service. Motion set for hearing on 111712011 at
10:00 AM before Judge Manuel L. Real. (et) (mg). (Entered: 09f29/2011)

0912912011

.4

MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in Support of MOTION for
Preliminary Injunction J filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service. (et)
(amar), (Entered: 09/29/2011)

09129/2011

.2

DECLARA nON of KAREN COVEL in Support of Motion for Preliminary
Injunction J filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service. (et) (amar). (Entered:
09/29/2011 )

0912912011

Q

DECLARATION of JULIANNA KROLAK in Support of Motion for
Preliminary Injunction 1 filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service. (et)
(amar). (Entered: 09/29/2011)

0912912011

1 DECLARA nON of WILLIAM GIRNER in Support of Motion for
Preliminary Injunction j filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service. (et)
(amar). (Entered: 09/29/2011)

09/29/2011

.a

DECLARATION of CHRISTOPHER MARSHALL in Support of Mati on for
Preliminary Injunction J filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service. (et)

ER 123
https:llecfcacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-binIDktRpt.pl?578713661642325-L

_ 452_0-1

5118/2012

CM/ECF - California Central District

Page 3 of6

124
(amar). (Entered: 09/2912011)
09/29/2011

9

09/29/2011

10

PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service, re
Memorandum in Support of Motion j] , Declaration of Christopher Marshall j; ,
MOTION for Preliminary Injunction 1. , Declaration of William Girner 1,
Declaration of Julianna Krolak §. , Declaration of Karen Covell served on
9/29/11. (et) (amar). (Entered: 09/301201 I)

10/06/2011

11

PROOF OF SERVICE filed by plaintiff Courthouse News Service, re
Memorandum in Support of Motion i ,Declaration (Motion related) .§. ,
Complaint - (Discovery), Complaint - (Discovery) 1, Summons Issued,
MOTION for Preliminary Injunction 1, Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties
2: , Declaration (Motion related) 1,Declaration (Motion related) §. ,
Declaration (Motion related) 1, Order .2 Michael D. Planet served on
10/04/11. (Matteo-Boehm, Rachel) (Entered: 10/0612011)

10110/2011

.u.

EX PARTE APPLICA nON to Continue Hearing on Plaintiffs Motion for
Preliminary Injunction from November 7, 2011 to January 17, 2012 filed by
Defendant Michael Planet. (Attachments: # 1Exhibit, #.6 Proposed Order)
(Naeve, Robert) (Entered: 10110/2011)

1011112011

11

OPPOSITION to EX PARTE APPLICATION to Continue Hearing on
Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction from November 7, 2011 to
January 17,201211 filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service. (Attachments:
# 1Proposed Order)(Matteo-Boehm,
Rachel) (Entered: 10/1112011)

1011112011

14

PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service, upon
Attorney General's Office on behalf of Plaintiff Michae 1 Planet, in his Official
Capacity as Court Executive OfficerlClerk of the Ventura County Superior
Court Michael Planet served on 9/2912011, answer due 1012012011. Service of
the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Yolanda Saganninaga in
compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.
Original Summons returned. (Matteo-Boehm, Rachel) (Entered: 1011112011)

1011 112011

15

PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service, upon
Defendant Michael Planet served on lO141201l, answer due 10125/201 L
Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Michael Planet, in
his Official Capacity as Court Executive OfficerlClerk of the Ventura County
Superior Court in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by
personal service. Original Summons returned. (Matteo-Boehm, Rachel)
(Entered: 1011112011)

1011112011

lQ

SUPPLEMENT to EX PARTE APPLICATION to Continue Hearing on
Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction from November 7, 2011 to
January 17, 201211 Declaration of Erica L. Reilley filed by Defendant
Michael Planet. (Attachments: # 1Exhibit)(Naeve, Robert) (Entered:
10/11/2011)

10/12/2011

11

NOTICE of Change of Attorney Information for attorney Erica Lynn Reilley
counsel for Defendant Michael Planet. Adding Erica L. Reilley as attorney as

ORDER RE: NOTICE TO COUNSEL by Judge Manuel L. Real, (Pj) (Entered:
09/2912011)

ER 124
https:l/ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-binIDktRpt.pl?578713661642325-L

_ 452_0-1

5/1812012

CMlECF - California Central District

Page4of6

125

counsel of record for Defendant Michael Planet for the reason indicated in the
G-06 Notice. Filed by Defendant Michael Planet (Reilley, Erica) (Entered:
10/12/2011)
10/1312011

is

ORDER DENYING CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON PLAlNTIFF'S
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION by Judge Manuel 1. Real:
denying 12 Ex Parte Application to Continue. (bp) (Entered: 10/1312011)

10114/2011

12

Joint STIPULA nON to Continue Hearing on Plaintiffs Motion for _
Preliminary Injunction from November 7, 2011 to November 21, 2011 Re:
MOTION for Preliminary Injunction 1
filed by Defendant Michael Planet.
(Attachments: # 1
Proposed Order CONTINUING HEARING ON
PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION FROM
NOVEMBER 7, 2011 TO NOVEMBER 21, 2011 )(Reilley, Erica) (Entered:
10/14/2011)

10/14/2011

20

ORDER by Judge Manuel 1. Real, re Stipulation to Continue, 12 Defendant's
Opposition to Plaintiff's motion for Preliminary Injunction 10/31/2011; Reply
on Motion for Preliminary Injunction 1117/2011; Motion set for hearing on
1112112011 at 10:00 AM before Judge Manuel 1. Real.) (Pj) (Entered:
10114120 II)

10120nOli

21

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case and Abstain filed by
Defendant Michael Planet. Motion set for hearing on 11/2112011 at 10:00 AM
before Judge Manuel 1. Real, (Attaclunents: # 1 Notice, # 1Proposed Order)
(Reilley, Erica) (Entered: 10/20/2011)

10120/2011

22

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re MOTION to Dismiss Case and
Abstain 21 filed by Defendant Michael Planet (Attachments: # 1
Exhibit)
(Reilley, Erica) (Entered: 10/2012011)

10/25/2011

23

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SERVICE filed by plaintiff Courthouse News
Service, served on Order re Notice to CounseL (Matteo-Boehm, Rachel)
(Entered: 10/25/2011)

10/3112011

24

OPPOSITION to MOTION to Dismiss Case and Abstain 21 filed by Plaintiff
Courthouse News Service. (Attachments: # 1
Proposed Order)(Matteo-Boehm,
Rachel) (Entered: 10/3112011)

10/3112011

25

Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction Opposition re:
MOTION for Preliminary Injunction 1
filed by Defendant Michael Planet.
(Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 1Declaration, # d Declaration, #
Declaration)(Reilley,
Erica) (Entered: 10/3112011)

.±

10/3112011

26

Objections to Evidence in opposition to re: MOTION for Preliminary
Injunction d filed by Defendant Michael Planet. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed
Order)(Reilley, Erica) (Entered: 10/3112011)

11107/2011

27

REPLY in Support of MOTION for Preliminary Injunction d filed by Plaintiff
Courthouse News Service. (Matteo-Boehm, Rachel) (Entered: 1110712011)

11107/2011

28

DECLARA nON of William Girdner in Support of MOTION for Preliminary
Injunction 1
(Supplemental) filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service.
(Matteo-Boehm, Rachel) (Entered: 11107/2011)

ER 125
https:llecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-binIDktRpt.pl?578713661642325-L

_452_0-1

5/1812012

CMlECF - California Central District

Page 5 of6

126
11107/2011

29

DECLARATION of Julianna Krolak in Support of MOTION for Preliminary
Injunction J. (Supplemental) filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Service.
(Matteo-Boehm, Rachel) (Entered: I 1107/2011)

11/07/2011

30

NOTICE OF LODGING filed re MOTION for Preliminary Injunction
(Attachments: # 1Proposed Order)(Matteo-Boehm, Rachel) (Entered:
11107/2011)

11107/2011

II RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News Serviceto

I

Objection/Opposition (Motion related) 26 (Matteo-Boehm, Rachel) (Entered:
11/07/2011)
11/07/2011

32

Objections in support re: MOTION for Preliminary Injunction J filed by
Plaintiff Courthouse News Service. (Attachments: # 1Proposed Order)
(Matteo-Boehm, Rachel) (Entered: 11107/2011)

11107/2011

33

REPLY in Support of MOTION to Dismiss Case and Abstain 21 filed by
Defendant Michael Planet. (Reilley, Erica) (Entered: 1110712011)

11/08/2011

34

NOTICE OF ERRATA filed by Defendant Michael Planet correcting Reply
(Motion related) 33, MOTION to Dismiss Case and Abstain 21 (Attachments:
#1
Supplement Corrected Reply In Support Of Motion to Dismiss and
Abstain)(Naeve, Robert) (Entered: 1110812011)

11/14/2011

35

OPPOSITION to MOTION for Preliminary Injunction J Defendant'S
Responses to Courthouse News Service's Objections to the Declarations of J
Camacho, C Kanatzar, R. Sherman, and K Dalton-Koch Submitted by
Defendant in Opposition to Courthouse News' Motion for Preliminary
Injunction filed by Defendant Michael Planet (Reilley, Erica) (Entered:
11/14/2011)

11117/2011

36

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Manuel L. Real: re: MOTION
for Preliminary Injunction} and MOTION to Dismiss Case and Abstain 21
previously scheduled for November 21,2011 at 10:00 AM. is hereby
continued to NOVEMBER 28,2011 at 10:00 A.M. for hearing. IT IS SO
ORDERED. (lcti) (Entered: 11117/2011)

11128/2011

37

NOTICE OF LODGING filed re MOTION to Dismiss Case and Abstain 21
(Attachments: # 1Proposed Order)(Reilley, Erica) (Entered: 11128/2011)

11128/2011

39

MINUTES OF motion for preliminary injunction J and motion to dismiss and
to abstain 21 . Motion Hearing held before Judge Manuel L. Real: The Court
DENIES plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction, and GRANTS
defendants motion to dismiss and to abstain, for reasons as stated on the record
Defendant shall submit a proposed order. Court Reporter: Theresa Lanza. (kti)
(Entered: 12/0112011)

11/30/2011

38

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS AND
ABSTAIN by Judge Manuel L. Real: 21 (MD J8-6. Case Terminated) (Pj)
(Entered: 11130/2011)

12115/2011

40

NOTICE OF APPEAL to the 9th CCA filed by Plaintiff Courthouse News
Service. Appeal of Order on Motion to Dismiss Case 38 (Appeal fee FEE NOT
PAID.) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 6 Exhibit 2)(Matteo-Boehm, Rachel)

ER 126
https:l/ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-binIDktRplpl?578713661642325-L

_452_0-1

5/1812012

CM/ECF - California Central District

Page 6 of6

127
(Entered: 12115/2011)
1211512011

41

NOTIFICATION by Circuit Court of Appellate Docket Number 11-57187 9th
CCA regarding Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 40 as to
Plaintiff Courthouse News Service. (dmap) (Entered: 12/15/2011)

01/0312012

42

NOTICE of Change of Attorney Information for attorney Rachel E MatteoBoehm counsel for Plaintiff Courthouse News Service. Changing firm name to
Bryan Cave LLP. Filed by plaintiff Courthouse News Service (Matteo-Boehm,
Rachel) (Entered: 01103/2012)

Olf0312012

43

APPEAL FEE PAID: re Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 40
as to Plaintiff Courthouse News Service; Receipt Number: LA0033328 in the
arnountof$455.
(dmap) (Entered: 01104/2012)

0110412012

44

TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on Monday, 11-28-11; 10:59 AM. Court
Reporter Theresa Lanza, phone number www.theresalanza.com.
Transcript
may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court
Reporter before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that
date it may be obtained through PACER. Notice of Intent to Redact due within
7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 1125/2012. Redacted Transcript
Deadline set for 2/4/20 I 2. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 4/3/2012.
(Lanza, Theresa) (Entered: 01104/2012)

0110412012

45

NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings
10:59 AM (Lanza, Theresa) (Entered: 01/0412012)

0110912012

46

TRANSCRIPT DESIGNA nON AND ORDERING FORM For Dates:
11/28/2011; Court Reporter: Theresa Lanza; Court of Appeals Case Number:
11·57187; Re: 40 (Matteo-Boehm, Rachel) (Entered: 0110912012)

0110912012

47

TRANSCRIPT ORDER for date of proceedings 11/28/2011 to 11128/2011 re:
Court of Appeal case number 11-57187, as to Plaintiff Courthouse News
Service Court Reporter Theresa Lanza. Civil Appeal, Court will contact Leila
Knox at [e-mail]
with any questions regarding this order.
Transcript portion requested: Other: 11128/2011 Hearing on Motion to
DismissfPreliminary
Injunction. Civil case appeal. (Matteo-Boehm, Rachel)
(Entered: 01/09/2012)

I
I

I
I

PACER Service Center

I

Monday, 11-28-11;

0511812012 10:29:35

IPA,?ER
Logm:

Transaction

IlbcOon

Descnp fien: IIDoCket
.
Report

Billable
Pages:

IDleost:

Receipt

I

IIClient Code: Sll15-00220-F .Pahn 016409
II~earcb
Criteria:

2: ll-cv-08083-R -MAN End
date: 5118/20 I 2

J

50

I

11°.

ER 127
https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-binIDktRpt.pl?578713661642325-L

_452_0-1

5/18/2012

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
On May 29, 2012, I caused a copy to be served of the within document:
EXCERPT OF RECORD, VOLUMES I & II
by placing the document listed above in a sealed envelope with postage thereon
fully prepaid, in the United States, and mailed to the address as set forth below:
Robert A. Naeve, Esq.
[e-mail]
Erica L. Reilley, Esq.
[e-mail]
JONES DAY
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Attorneys for DefendantslRespondents
I certify that I am a member of the Bar of this Court at whose direction the
service was made. Executed this 29th day of May, 2012, at San Francisco,
California.