Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Date: 09-15-2023
Case Style:
Case Number: 1:20-CV-231
Judge: Daniel M. Traynor
Court: United States District Court for the District of North Dakota (Burleigh County)
Plaintiff's Attorney: Lynn Boughey
Defendant's Attorney: Courtney Rebecca Titus
Description: Bismarck, North Dakota civil rights lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a First Amendment violation theory.
This is the case of a disgruntled man who was frustrated he was not permitted to make every single point he wanted to the Valley City Commission. Drake alleges the City violated his and Lloyd Nelson's (“Nelson”) First Amendment rights to speak at City Commission meetings. See Doc. No. 1. For years, Drake attended City Commission meetings on several occasions to ask questions, make statements concerning the City's budget, employees, projects, and legislative items. Id. at ¶ 24. On occasion, Drake and Nelson were asked not to speak, not to question the committee, or asked to leave the podium at City Commission meetings.
The City implemented a policy to regulate the public's participation in City Commission meetings, which was based on the North Dakota Attorney General's Open Meeting Manual (“OMM”). This Court has already concluded the OMM is an “interpretation of case law, state statutes, past Attorney General opinions, and administrative rules regarding open records and meetings.” Doc. No. 23, ¶ 6. The Attorney General's OMM indicates, “[t]he purpose of the open meetings law is to give members of the public access to the meetings of a governing board of a public entity but that access does not give members of the public the right to participate or speak at the public meeting.” North Dakota Office of Attorney General, Open Meetings Manual, p. 12, found at https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/sites/ag/files/documents/OpenMeetingsManual.pdf; see also Doc. No. 33, p. 2 (noting the OMM is available for review at the web address); Doc. No. 33-1, p. 67 (memo from City Attorney Marl Martineck to Mayor Dave Carlsrud explaining the OMM and quoting the same)
* * *
This is the case of a disgruntled man who was frustrated he was not permitted to make every single point he wanted to the Valley City Commission. Drake alleges the City violated his and Lloyd Nelson's (“Nelson”) First Amendment rights to speak at City Commission meetings. See Doc. No. 1. For years, Drake attended City Commission meetings on several occasions to ask questions, make statements concerning the City's budget, employees, projects, and legislative items. Id. at ¶ 24. On occasion, Drake and Nelson were asked not to speak, not to question the committee, or asked to leave the podium at City Commission meetings. See id.
The City implemented a policy to regulate the public's participation in City Commission meetings, which was based on the North Dakota Attorney General's Open Meeting Manual (“OMM”). Doc. Nos. 33, ¶ 6, 33-1, p. 67. This Court has already concluded the OMM is an “interpretation of case law, state statutes, past Attorney General opinions, and administrative rules regarding open records and meetings.” Doc. No. 23, ¶ 6. The Attorney General's OMM indicates, “[t]he purpose of the open meetings law is to give members of the public access to the meetings of a governing board of a public entity but that access does not give members of the public the right to participate or speak at the public meeting.” North Dakota Office of Attorney General, Open Meetings Manual, p. 12, found at https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/sites/ag/files/documents/OpenMeetingsManual.pdf; see also Doc. No. 33, p. 2 (noting the OMM is available for review at the web address); Doc. No. 33-1, p. 67 (memo from City Attorney Marl Martineck to Mayor Dave Carlsrud explaining the OMM and quoting the same).
Outcome: Dismissed.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: