NBC Subsidiary (KNBC-TV), Inc. v. Superior Court (Locke)

ORDER
Review Granted NBC SUBSIDIARY (KNBC-TV), INC. et al., Petitioners v. LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent SONDRA LOCKE et al., Real Parties in Interest C.A. 2nd, Div. 5, No. B105327 S056924 California Supreme Court Filed December 18, 1996         Petition for review GRANTED.
        The issues to be argued before this court shall be limited to whether there is a constitutional right of public access to civil trials.


(Editor Note - The above-mentioned Court of Appeal case has been granted review by the California Supreme Court. For your convenience we reprint below the Daily Journal's Ruling Column brief which summarized the earlier decision of the lower court.)

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Superior Court's Restraint on Access of Public And Press to Civil Trial Impedes First Amendment Rights.
        The C.A. 2nd has held that a superior court improperly curtailed the public and press' access to a civil trial.
        Sandra Locke brought an action against Clint Eastwood alleging deceit, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, and fiduciary duty breach arising out of alleged promises Eastwood made to assist Locke in the development of certain film projects. Prior to trial, the trial court issued an order prohibiting radio and television coverage of the trial. The bailiff was instructed to clear the courtroom of everyone except the litigants and the attorneys at every break where the jury was not present. The trial court also delayed the release of the transcripts until after the trial. The trial court held that such steps were necessary to ensure that the jury was fair and impartial, and not exposed to information regarding evidence that might not be presented or was not relevant to the proceedings. NBC Subsidiary (KNBC-TV) Inc., the Los Angeles Times, and the California Community News filed a mandate petition challenging the trial court's order.
        The C.A. 2nd issued a peremptory writ of mandate. The U. S. Supreme Court has held that the public and the press have an unqualified First Amendment right to attend criminal trials. Although the Court had not addressed the issue of whether there was a similar right regarding civil trials, the Court has repeatedly recognized that open civil trials are an essential attribute of the English common law and the justice systems of colonial America. Civil trials historically have been open to the public and that openness served important practical and philosophical purposes. When the First Amendment was adopted, civil trials had long been presumptively open. The policy reasons identified for the qualified access to criminal trials applied equally as well to civil trials. In issuing the limited closure order in this case, the trial court had legitimate concerns relating to jury exposure to inadmissible or irrelevant evidence. However, that possibility by itself was not sufficient to support the closure order. The order did not identify what inadmissible evidence might have been the subject of disclosure to the jury via news reports. "The mere exposure of jurors to inadmissible evidence does not warrant closure of all in limine hearings in every case." Moreover, the Supreme Court has found that exposure to inadmissible prejudicial matters does not necessarily result in an unfair trial. Also, there were other, less severe, means of ensuring that the litigants would receive a fair trial, including voir dire of potential jurors and admonitions to disregard news reports.
        NBC SUBSIDIARY (KNBC-TV), INC. v. SUPERIOR COURT (LOCKE),         CA 2nd, Div. 5, No. B105327, filed September 17, 1996, by Turner, J.
        The full text of this case appears in 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11457, September 20, 1996.

98 Daily Appellate Report