O'Neil et al v. Gilman et al
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The Court has reviewed Judge Johnston's 16 Findings and Recommendations for clear error. The Court finds no error in Judge Johnston's Findings and Recommendations, and adopts them in full. IT IS ORDERED that Judge Johnston's 16 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED IN FULL. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' 8 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. (Copy of Order mailed to Little Dog). Signed by Judge Brian Morris on 9/12/2017. (SLR)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
GREAT FALLS DIVISION
JERRY O’NEIL, individually and as
President of Montanans for Multiple
Use, on behalf of himself, and the
members of MONTANANS FOR
MULTIPLE USE, and CHERYL
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
TYLER P. GILMAN, Clerk of the U.S.
DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF MONTANA, in his
official capacity, and the UNITED
STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA, in
its administrative capacity,
Plaintiff Jerry O’Neil, an attorney licensed to practice law in Blackfeet
Tribal Courts, but not in Montana state courts, and the president of Montanans for
Multiple Use (“MMU”), applied for admission to practice in the U.S. District
Court for the District of Montana on May 7, 2015. (Doc. 9 at 2.) The Clerk of
Court denied his application because he failed to meet the admission requirements
set forth in District of Montana Local Rule 83.1. Mr. O’Neil filed a complaint on
behalf of himself, MMU, and Cheryl Little Dog asking the Court to declare Local
Rule 83.1(b) unconstitutional and requesting an injunction directing Defendants to
approve his application to practice in United States Courts for the District of
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(b)(6) arguing that Mr. O’Neil fails to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted because (1) the District of Montana has set reasonable standards for
admission, which Mr. O’Neil failed to meet; (2) Defendants’ denial of Mr.
O’Neil’s application did not violate MMU’s First Amendment rights; and (3)
Defendants’ denial of Mr. O’Neil’s application did not violate Ms. Little Dog’s
Sixth Amendment rights to counsel. (Doc. 8). United States Magistrate Judge John
Johnston entered Findings and Recommendations in this matter on August 16,
2017. (Doc. 16.) Neither party filed objections.
When a party makes no objections, the Court need not review de novo the
proposed Findings and Recommendations. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52
(1986). This Court will review Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations,
however, for clear error. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach.,
Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981).
Judge Johnston determined that Local Rule 83.1 is constitutional because it
sets reasonable standards for admission to the District of Montana and does not
contain a residency requirement. (Doc. 16 at 3.) District courts possess the
discretion to adopt local rules that regulate its day-to-day business. Frazier v.
Heebe, 482 U.S. 641, 645 (1987). This discretion includes rules regulating
admissions to its own bar. Id. However, district courts may not adopt rules
condition admission into its bar on the applicant residing within the state where the
court sits. Id. at 649. Local Rule 83.1(a)(2) states that “only an attorney authorized
to appear under this rule may appear on behalf of a party.” The rule further
provides that only attorneys “who are members in good standing of the State Bar
of Montana may be admitted as members of this court.” L.R. 83.1(b)(1).
Accordingly, Judge Johnston recommends that the Court finds that Local Rule
83.1(b) represents a reasonable exercise of the District of Montana’s discretion to
control admission to its bar and recommends that the Court grant Defendant’s
motion. (Doc. 16 at 4.)
Judge Johnston found that MMU was not prevented from exercising its First
Amendment right to freedom of expression. Id. at 5. The District of Montana has
set reasonable requirements that counsel must meet to appear in its courts. Mr.
O’Neil does not meet these requirements. Judge Johnston found that nothing in the
District of Montana’s local rules prevent MMU from hiring counsel who does meet
the requirements to represent its interests. Id. Judge Johnston recommends that the
Court find that Defendants have not violated MMU’s First Amendment rights and
recommends that the district court grant Defendant’s motion. Id.
Judge Johnston determined that denial of O’Neil’s application for admission
did not violate Little Dog’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Id. Little Dog had
the benefit of court-appointed counsel at trial. Judge Johnston recommends that the
Court grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Id.
The Court has reviewed Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations
for clear error. The Court finds no error in Judge Johnston’s Findings and
Recommendations, and adopts them in full.
IT IS ORDERED that Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations
(Doc. 16), is ADOPTED IN FULL.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is
DATED this 12th day of September, 2017.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?