Lawsuit: Courthouse News Service v. Texas Office of Court Administration, Et Al.

Case 4:24-cv-00368-SDJ Document 10 Filed 07/05/24 Page 1 of 27 PageID #: 35
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE,
Plaintiff,
v.
Court Case No. 4:24-cv-00368
MICHAEL GOULD, in his official capacity as
Collin County District Clerk; DAVID
TRANTHAM, in his official capacity as Denton
County District Clerk; MEGAN LAVOIE, in her
official capacity as Director for the Texas Office
of Court Administration, et al.
Defendants.
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND

PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
Plaintiff, Courthouse News Services (“Courthouse News”), by and through its undersigned
attorneys, alleges as follows against Defendants, Joanna Staton, in her official capacity as Bell
County District Clerk (“Staton”); Gloria A. Martinez, in her official capacity as Bexar County
District Clerk (“Martinez”); Cassandra Tigner, in her official capacity as Brazoria County District
Clerk (“Tigner”); Gabriel Garcia, in his official capacity as Brazos County District Clerk
(“Garcia”); Casie Walker, in her official capacity as Burnet County District Clerk (“Walker”);
Michael Gould, in his official capacity as Collin County District Clerk (“Gould”); Hon. David
Trantham, in his official capacity as Denton County District Clerk (“Trantham”); Clarissa
Webster, in her official capacity as Ector County District Clerk (“Webster”); Melanie Reed, in her
official capacity as Ellis County District Clerk (“Reed”); Norma Favela Barceleau, in her official
capacity as El Paso County District Clerk (“Barceleau”); John D. Kinard, in his official capacity
as Galveston County District Clerk (“Kinard”); Laura Hinojosa, in her official capacity as Hidalgo
40897023v.1
County District Clerk (“Hinojosa”); Jamie Smith, in his official capacity as Jefferson County
District Clerk (“Smith”); Hon. David Lloyd, in his official capacity as Johnson County District
Clerk (“Lloyd”); Jon Gimble, in his official capacity as McLennan County District Clerk
(“Gimble”); Alex Archuleta, in his official capacity as Midland County District Clerk
(“Archuleta”); Melisa Miller, in her official capacity as Montgomery County District Clerk
(“Miller”); Loretta Cammack, in her official capacity as Nacogdoches County District Clerk
(“Cammack”); Anne Lorentzen, in her official capacity as Nueces County District Clerk
(“Lorentzen”); Stephanie Menke, in her official capacity as Potter County District Clerk
(“Menke”); Hon. Tammy Robinson, in her official capacity as Taylor County District Clerk
(“Robinson”) (collectively the “District Clerk Defendants”); Megan LaVoie, in her official
capacity as Director for the Texas Office of Court Administration (“LaVoie”) (the District Clerk
Defendants and LaVoie are collectively referred to as “Defendants”).
INTRODUCTION
1. Plaintiff Courthouse News brings this action challenging Defendants’ practice of
restricting access to new e-filed civil petitions filed with the District Clerk Defendants when the
petitions are received and withholding access until after the completion of clerical processing by
local clerk staff.
2. E-Filing is mandatory for all attorneys filing new petitions in civil cases across all
state district courts. While not required, non-attorney filers are encouraged to file electronically as
well. To facilitate statewide e-filing, the Texas Office of Court Administration (“OCA”) procured
a contract with an e-filing vendor, Tyler Technologies, Inc. (“Tyler”), to provide e-filing to all
Texas courts through Tyler’s File & Serve system, which is branded as “e-File Texas” for use in
Texas.
40897023v.1
3. The Texas e-filing system—File & Serve—works off a central component called
the Electronic Filing Manager (“EFM”), which receives and houses documents submitted by filers
throughout the state. E-filed petitions remain in the EFM until local court staff have completed
administrative processing, which typically culminates in the petition being “accepted,” but
sometimes results in the petition being “returned for correction” or “rejected.” District clerks can
use a separate Tyler product called the Press Review Tool to enable the press and public to view
new e-filed petitions while they sit in the EFM awaiting processing. Otherwise, the new e-filed
petitions sit in the EFM, effectively sealed, until local clerk staff are able to log into their computer
workstations and process them.
4. The OCA has contracted with Tyler to provide the Press Review Tool to each
district clerk that requests it. The Travis County District Clerk implemented the Press Review
Tool in September 2022, and it has operated successfully since then to provide the press and public
with on-receipt access to new e-filed civil petitions.
5. The current Technology Standards promulgated by the Texas Judicial Council for
Information Technology state that “[a]bsent extraordinary circumstances, clerks must accept,
return for correction, or reject documents as so authorized on the same business day they are
received by the clerk’s office and no later than the next business day when circumstances make it
impracticable to do so on the same business day.” Technology Standards v8.0, § 4.8.3 (Feb. 2024).
As a practical matter, however, newly e-filed civil petitions in some district courts routinely remain
in the EFM until at least the day after the district clerk receives them. Fortunately, district clerk
staff taking a long time to complete administrative processing of e-filed civil petitions is not
problematic as long as the district clerk has implemented the Press Review Tool to enable the press
and public to access new petitions irrespective of processing status.
40897023v.1
6. On January 6, 2024, Courthouse News wrote to the district clerks for the counties
of Dallas, Collin, and Denton requesting that they implement the Press Review Tool to provide
access to new e-filed civil petitions when they are received by the clerks. Exhibits 1-3. The Dallas
County District Clerk agreed to this request and implemented the Press Review Tool as of May
2024. The district clerks for Bexar, El Paso, Nacogdoches, and Nueces counties received similar
letters sent on May 31, 2024. Exhibits 4-7. The district court clerks for Bell, Brazoria, Brazos,
Burnet, Ector, Ellis, Galveston, Hidalgo, Jefferson, Johnson, McLennan, Midland, Montgomery,
Potter, and Taylor counties received similar letters sent on June 21, 2024. Exhibits 8-22. The
District Clerk Defendants did not respond to Courthouse News’ letters or refused to implement the
Press Review Tool, and they continue their practice of restricting access to new e-filed civil
petitions until after completion of clerical processing.
7. Courthouse News challenges Defendants’ policy and practice of withholding public
and press access to new civil petitions e-filed in the respective counties for the District Clerk
Defendants until after the completion of administrative processing by local District Clerk
Defendants’ staff. Courthouse News seeks a declaratory judgment declaring Defendants’ policies
and practices that affect delays in access to newly e-filed civil petitions are unconstitutional, and
a preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting Defendants from continuing those policies and
practices.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
8. Courthouse News’ claims arise under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the
United States Constitution and the Civil Rights Act, Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983, et seq. This Court has
subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (federal question), 1343 (civil rights), and
2201 (declaratory relief). Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this District.
40897023v.1
9. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), and in this Division,
because the District Clerks in Collin and Denton counties operate in this District and in this
Division, the District Clerks of Jefferson and Nacogdoches operate in this District and the Director
of the OCA is responsible for procuring and supplying the statewide e-filing and public access
systems used by the District Clerk Defendants. A substantial part of the events or omissions giving
rise to Courthouse News’ claims occurred in this District and in this Division. The First
Amendment violations giving rise to this action took place, and continue to take place, in the
offices of each of the Defendants.
PARTIES
10. Courthouse News is a nationwide news service founded almost 30 years ago.
Courthouse News now employs approximately 240 people, most of them editors and reporters,
covering state and federal trial and appellate courts in all 50 states.
11. Defendant Joanna Staton is the District Clerk for Bell County District Court and is
named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Staton, in her official capacity as
District Clerk, is responsible for, among other things, access to new civil petitions filed in Bell
County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in her official capacity,
Defendant Staton and those acting under her direction and supervision are directly involved with
and responsible for the restriction in access to new petitions experienced by Courthouse News,
other members of the press, and the public, which acts reflect the official policies and practices of
her office. Defendant Staton and those acting under her direction have the ability to provide access
to new civil petitions e-filed in Bell County District Court at the time of receipt.
12. Defendant Gloria A. Martinez is the District Clerk for Bexar County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Martinez, in her official
40897023v.1
capacity as District Clerk, is responsible for, among other things, access to new civil petitions filed
in Bexar County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in her official
capacity, Defendant Martinez and those acting under her direction and supervision are directly
involved with and responsible for the restriction in access to new petitions experienced by
Courthouse News, other members of the press, and the public, which acts reflect the official
policies and practices of her office. Defendant Martinez and those acting under her direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Bexar County District Court at the
time of receipt.
13. Defendant Cassandra Tigner is the District Clerk for Brazoria County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Tigner, in her official
in Brazoria County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in her official
capacity, Defendant Tigner and those acting under her direction and supervision are directly
policies and practices of her office. Defendant Tigner and those acting under her direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Brazoria County District Court at the
time of receipt.
14. Defendant Gabriel Garcia is the District Clerk for Brazos County District Court and
is named as a defendant herein in his official capacity. Defendant Garcia, in his official capacity
as District Clerk, is responsible for, among other things, access to new civil petitions filed in
Brazos County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in his official
capacity, Defendant Garcia and those acting under his direction and supervision are directly
40897023v.1
policies and practices of his office. Defendant Garcia and those acting under his direction have the
ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Brazos County District Court at the time
of receipt.
15. Defendant Casie Walker is the District Clerk for Burnet County District Court and
is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Walker, in her official capacity
as District Clerk, is responsible for, among other things, access to new civil petitions filed in Burnet
Defendant Walker and those acting under her direction and supervision are directly involved with
her office. Defendant Walker and those acting under her direction have the ability to provide access
to new civil petitions e-filed in Burnet County District Court at the time of receipt.
16. Defendant Michael Gould is the District Clerk for Collin County District Court and
is named as a defendant herein in that official capacity. Defendant Gould, in his official capacity
as District Clerk, is responsible for, among other things, access to new civil petitions filed in Collin
County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in his official capacity,
Defendant Gould and those acting under his direction and supervision are directly involved with
his office. Defendant Gould and those acting under his direction have the ability to provide access
40897023v.1
to new civil petitions e-filed in Collin County District Court at the time of receipt. Defendant
Gould is represented by counsel who has made an appearance.
17. Defendant David Trantham is the District Clerk for Denton County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in his official capacity. Defendant Trantham, in his official
in Denton County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in his official
capacity, Defendant Trantham and those acting under his direction and supervision are directly
policies and practices of his office. Defendant Trantham and those acting under his direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Denton County District Court at the
time of receipt. Defendant Trantham is represented by counsel who has made an appearance.
18. Defendant Clarissa Webster is the District Clerk for Ector County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Webster, in her official
in Ector County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in her official
capacity, Defendant Webster and those acting under her direction and supervision are directly
policies and practices of her office. Defendant Webster and those acting under her direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Ector County District Court at the time
of receipt.
40897023v.1
19. Defendant Melanie Reed is the District Clerk for Ellis County District Court and is
named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Reed, in her official capacity as
District Clerk, is responsible for, among other things, access to new civil petitions filed in Ellis
Defendant Reed and those acting under her direction and supervision are directly involved with
her office. Defendant Reed and those acting under her direction have the ability to provide access
to new civil petitions e-filed in Ellis County District Court at the time of receipt.
20. Defendant Norma Favela Barceleau is the District Clerk for El Paso County District
Court and is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Barceleau, in her
official capacity as District Clerk, is responsible for, among other things, access to new civil
petitions filed in El Paso County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting
in her official capacity, Defendant Barceleau and those acting under her direction and supervision
are directly involved with and responsible for the restriction in access to new petitions experienced
by Courthouse News, other members of the press, and the public, which acts reflect the official
policies and practices of her office. Defendant Barceleau and those acting under her direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in El Paso County District Court at the
time of receipt.
21. Defendant John D. Kinard is the District Clerk for Galveston County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in his official capacity. Defendant Kinard, in his official
in Galveston County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in his
40897023v.1
official capacity, Defendant Kinard and those acting under his direction and supervision are
directly involved with and responsible for the restriction in access to new petitions experienced by
policies and practices of his office. Defendant Kinard and those acting under his direction have the
ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Galveston County District Court at the
time of receipt.
22. Defendant Laura Hinojosa is the District Clerk for Hidalgo County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Hinojosa, in her official
in Hidalgo County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in her official
capacity, Defendant Hinojosa and those acting under her direction and supervision are directly
policies and practices of her office. Defendant Hinojosa and those acting under her direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Hidalgo County District Court at the
time of receipt.
23. Defendant Jamie Smith is the District Clerk for Jefferson County District Court and
is named as a defendant herein in his official capacity. Defendant Smith, in his official capacity as
District Clerk, is responsible for, among other things, access to new civil petitions filed in Jefferson
County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in his official capacity,
Defendant Smith and those acting under his direction and supervision are directly involved with
10
40897023v.1
his office. Defendant Smith and those acting under his direction have the ability to provide access
to new civil petitions e-filed in Jefferson County District Court at the time of receipt.
24. Defendant Hon. David Lloyd is the District Clerk for Johnson County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in his official capacity. Defendant Lloyd, in his official capacity
as District Clerk, is responsible for, among other things, access to new civil petitions filed in
Johnson County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in his official
capacity, Defendant Lloyd and those acting under his direction and supervision are directly
policies and practices of his office. Defendant Lloyd and those acting under his direction have the
ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Johnson County District Court at the time
of receipt.
25. Defendant Jon Gimble is the District Clerk for McLennan County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in his official capacity. Defendant Gimble, in his official
in McLennan County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in his
official capacity, Defendant Gimble and those acting under his direction and supervision are
policies and practices of his office. Defendant Gimble and those acting under his direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in McLennan County District Court at
the time of receipt.
11
40897023v.1
26. Defendant Alex Archuleta is the District Clerk for Midland County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in his official capacity. Defendant Archuleta, in his official
in Midland County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in his official
capacity, Defendant Archuleta and those acting under his direction and supervision are directly
policies and practices of his office. Defendant Archuleta and those acting under his direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Midland County District Court at the
time of receipt.
27. Defendant Melisa Miller is the District Clerk for Montgomery County District
Court and is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Miller, in her official
in Montgomery County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in her
official capacity, Defendant Miller and those acting under her direction and supervision are
policies and practices of her office. Defendant Miller and those acting under her direction have the
ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Montgomery County District Court at the
time of receipt.
28. Defendant Loretta Cammack is the District Clerk for Nacogdoches County District
Court and is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Cammack, in her
12
40897023v.1
petitions filed in Nacogdoches County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt.
Acting in her official capacity, Defendant Cammack and those acting under her direction and
supervision are directly involved with and responsible for the restriction in access to new petitions
experienced by Courthouse News, other members of the press, and the public, which acts reflect
the official policies and practices of her office. Defendant Cammack and those acting under her
direction have the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Nacogdoches County
District Court at the time of receipt.
29. Defendant Anne Lorentzen is the District Clerk for Nueces County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Lorentzen, in her official
in Nueces County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in her official
capacity, Defendant Lorentzen and those acting under her direction and supervision are directly
policies and practices of her office. Defendant Lorentzen and those acting under her direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Nueces County District Court at the
time of receipt.
30. Defendant Stephnie Menke is the District Clerk for Potter County District Court
and is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Menke, in her official
in Potter County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting in her official
capacity, Defendant Menke and those acting under her direction and supervision are directly
13
40897023v.1
policies and practices of her office. Defendant Menke and those acting under her direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Potter County District Court at the
time of receipt.
31. Defendant Hon. Tammy Robinson is the District Clerk for Taylor County District
Court and is named as a defendant herein in her official capacity. Defendant Robinson, in her
petitions filed in Taylor County and has the ability to provide access at the time of receipt. Acting
in her official capacity, Defendant Robinson and those acting under her direction and supervision
are directly involved with and responsible for the restriction in access to new petitions experienced
by Courthouse News, other members of the press, and the public, which acts reflect the official
policies and practices of his office. Defendant Robinson and those acting under her direction have
the ability to provide access to new civil petitions e-filed in Taylor County District Court at the
time of receipt.
32. Defendant LaVoie, in her official capacity as Administrator of the OCA, is
responsible for, among other things, the administration of the statewide e-filing system used by
Texas Courts, and public access to court records through those systems, including through any
systems licensed from or otherwise provided by third parties. Defendant LaVoie and those acting
under her direction have the ability to provide access to new civil petitions at the time of receipt.
Attached as Exhibit 23 is a true and correct copy of an amendment to the statewide e-filing
contract, signed by Defendant LaVoie on June 24, 2022, between OCA and Tyler pursuant to
which the OCA authorized Tyler to provide pre-processing access to new e-filed civil petitions in
all district courts of Texas through the Press Review Tool. The ability of Courthouse News or any
14
40897023v.1
county district court to use the Press Review Tool is contingent on the OCA providing it through
its contract with Tyler. Defendant LaVoie is represented by counsel who has made an appearance.
33. Defendants’ actions, as alleged in this Petition, are under the color of Texas law
and constitute state action within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
34. Defendants are sued in their official capacities only. Courthouse News seeks relief
against Defendants as well as their agents, assistants, successors, employees, and all persons acting
in concert or cooperation with them or at their direction or under their control.
FACTS AND ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS
A. Courthouse News Reports Daily News From Texas Courts.
35. Courthouse News offers its readers a variety of publications. Its New Litigation
Reports contain original, staff-written summaries of significant new civil lawsuits, and are sent to
subscribers via e-mail each evening. Its Daily Brief covers state and federal appellate rulings
throughout the nation, including all United States Supreme Court and federal circuit decisions and
significant rulings from the federal district courts.
36. Courthouse News also publishes a freely available website at
www.courthousenews.com featuring news reports and commentary. The website functions much
like a print daily newspaper with articles rotating on and off the page in a 24-hour news cycle.
Roughly 30,000 people read the Courthouse News website each day.
37. Courthouse News has been credited as the original source of reporting on various
topics by a wide range of publications, including: The Mercury News, ABA Journal, ABC News,
The Atlantic, Austin American Statesman, Black Christian News Network, California Bar Journal,
CBS News, The Christian Science Monitor, The Daily Beast, The Dallas Morning News, Forbes,
15
40897023v.1
Fox News, The Guardian, The Hill, Houston Chronicle, The Huffington Post, Long Island Press,
Los Angeles Times, Mother Jones, National Public Radio (NPR), NBC News, New York Daily
News, New York Magazine, The New York Times, The Orange County Register, Politico, Rolling
Stone, Salt Lake City Tribune, San Antonio Express-News, Slate, The Telegraph (UK), The Wall
Street Journal, The Washington Post, The Washington Times, Women’s Health Policy Report,
United Press International (UPI), USA Today, U.S. News and World Report, and the YouTube
news channel. American, Canadian, and New Zealand radio shows have also interviewed
Courthouse News’ reporters.
38. Courthouse News has more than 2,200 subscribers nationwide, including law firms,
law schools, government offices, and news outlets such as: The Associated Press, The Atlanta
Journal Constitution, The Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, CNN, Denver Post, Detroit Free Press,
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, Fox Entertainment Group, Honolulu Civil
Beat, Las Vegas Review-Journal, Los Angeles Times, North Jersey Media Group, Pacific Coast
Business Times, Philadelphia Business Journal, Phoenix New Times, Pinterest, Plymouth
Independent, Portland Business Journal, St. Paul Business Journal, The Salt Lake Tribune, The
San Jose Mercury News, Seattle Times, San Antonio Express News, Tampa Bay Business Journal,
The Wall Street Journal, Walt Disney Company, The Washington Post, and Warner Bros.
39. Nationwide, educational institutions that subscribe to Courthouse News reports
include Boston University, Columbia Journalism Investigations, MIT School of Management,
Stanford University, University of Chicago, University of Maryland – College of Journalism,
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of Virginia School of Law, and Drake
University Law Library.
16
40897023v.1
40. In Texas, The Dallas Morning News and San Antonio Express-News subscribe, as
well as the iHeart Media chain of 850 radio stations. A total of seven television stations subscribe,
KEYE-TV, KTVT-11 (Ft. Worth), KVUE-TV (Austin), KXAN News (Austin), NBC5 (Ft. Worth)
and WFAA-TV (Dallas). Governmental subscribers include the Dallas City Attorney’s Office,
State Bar of Texas, Office of the General Counsel and the City of San Antonio Attorney’s Office.
Baylor College and the Texas Association of School Boards also subscribe along with Texas-based
corporations such as Energy Transfer, Cook Children’s Health Care System, DHA Housing
Solutions for North Texas, Hunt Oil Company, Mewbourne Oil Company, and Whole Foods.
41. In its Texas New Litigation Reports, Courthouse News covers general civil
litigation, focusing on actions brought against business entities and public institutions. Its coverage
of Texas includes new litigation filed in district courts of the District Clerk Defendants.
42. Courthouse News does not report on or seek to review the small number of new
civil petitions that are statutorily confidential or otherwise not open to the public, or petitions that
are accompanied by a motion to seal. Such petitions are screened away from press and public
access by Defendants’ e-filing software.
43. The District Clerk Defendants have not implemented the Press Review Tool
available under OCA’s contract with Tyler. To prepare the new litigation reports that cover the
district courts for the District Clerk Defendants, Courthouse News reporters go to the courts’
websites for docket information and then proceed to re:SearchTX, the statewide site run by OCA
through a contract with Tyler, to see full text of petitions, paying 10 cents per page. However, the
petitions are not available via these platforms — or by any other means — until after clerk staff
have completed administrative processing.
17
40897023v.1
44. Given the nature of the coverage in Courthouse News’ New Litigation Reports and
its other news publications, any delay in the ability of a reporter to obtain and review new petitions
necessarily holds up Courthouse News’ reporting of new controversies for its readers.
45. Up to the present, all the new civil petitions e-filed in the respective district courts
of the District Clerk Defendants are restricted until after local staff processes them, with anywhere
from twenty percent to ninety percent of the new civil petitions e-filed in those courts in effect
sealed for one or more days after filing.
B. The First Amendment Right of Access Attaches to Civil Petitions When the Court
Receives Them.
46. A right of access grounded in the First Amendment applies to non-confidential civil
petitions.
47. A new petition serves as the opening bell in a legal fight. A longstanding tradition
in American courts gives reporters access to new civil petitions when they cross the clerk’s counter
and before administrative processing. This allows the public to hear about new cases quickly, when
they are still newsworthy and likely to be the subject of public attention and discussion.
48. News coverage operates in a daily cycle where news events, including newly filed
petitions, occur during the day and are reported that afternoon and evening, after which
newsmakers and reporters sleep, only to start the cycle again the next day. When news is delayed
until the next day or longer, it is devalued by the delay. Just as day-old bread is less likely to be
consumed, the news in day-old petitions is less likely to be reported and read, because it is “old
news.” See Courthouse News Service v. Planet (“Planet III”), 947 F.3d 581, 585 (9th Cir. 2020)
(“The peculiar value of news is in the spreading of it while it is fresh”).
49. Traditionally, at courts across the country, new civil petitions were made available
when they crossed the counter so they could be reviewed by journalists who visited the courthouse
18
40897023v.1
to report on the day’s news. Intake clerks would set new civil petitions aside for press review as
they came across the intake counter. The box on the counter that held those petitions was often
available to anyone who was interested. This tradition was affirmed by Eighth Circuit Judge Bobby
Shepherd during during oral arguments in Courthouse News Serv. v. Gilmer et al. (8th Cir. No.
21-2632), a case involving the same issues as here: “There was a time when — and some in this
room may remember it — when you took a pleading to the courthouse and the clerk stamped it
physically and it went into different bins and it was available immediately.”
50. Courthouse News’ experience in Texas is no different from, and is consistent with,
this nationwide experience and tradition. When it began covering the Harris County district court
in 1999, Courthouse News’ reporter was allowed to go behind the counter in the clerk’s office to
view and report on the days’ newly filed petitions as they were received by the court. Courthouse
News expanded its coverage to Dallas County district court in 2000, at which time journalists were
allowed to review new civil petitions on a long wooden table located behind the counter in the
clerk’s office as soon as the new petitions crossed the intake counter. In 2003, Courthouse News
expanded its coverage to Travis County district court and found a similar tradition of access—
newly-filed petitions were kept for press review in a large stack located behind the horseshoe-
shaped counter where the reception clerk worked.
51. Public access to new petitions allows the public to supervise the judicial process by
learning of parties to the dispute, alleged facts, issues for trial, and relief sought. The access also
allows the public to understand the activity of the courts, brings accountability to the court system,
and informs the public on matters of public concern. When a petition is withheld from the public,
it leaves the public unaware that a claim has been levelled and state power has been invoked.
19
40897023v.1
52. The analysis of an alleged violation of the First Amendment right of access is a
two-step process. The first step is to determine whether, as a general matter, there is a right of
access to the particular proceeding or documents at issue. If the answer to that question is “yes,”
the court proceeds to the second step, which is to determine if the restriction on access satisfies
Constitutional scrutiny. See, e.g., Courthouse News Serv. v. Planet, 947 F.3d at 581, 589-97 (9th
Cir. 2020) (“Planet III”) (discussing and applying two-step process established by Press-
Enterprise Co. v. Superior Ct. (“Press-Enterprise II”), 478 U.S. 1 (1986)); Courthouse News v.
Jackson, 2009 WL 2163609, (S.D. Tex. July 20, 2009).
53. To answer the question posed by the first step, courts examine whether experience
and logic support the existence of the right of access, Press Enterprise II. “There is no dispute that,
historically, courts have openly provided the press and general public with access to civil
petitions.” Schaefer, 440 F. Supp. 3d at 557; accord Bernstein, 814 F.3d at 141 (“Petitions have
historically been publicly accessible by default . . . . Logical considerations also support a
presumption of public access.”).
54. Courthouse News has also collected evidence showing that, in states where it covers
the courts in person on a regular basis, there is a history of access to new civil actions upon receipt
of the pleading regardless of whether court staff have completed clerical processing in every region
of the United States—north (Michigan and Wisconsin), south (Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia,
Louisiana, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia), central (Colorado, Illinois, Nebraska, Ohio,
Oklahoma, and Utah), east (Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont),
and west (Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington). This evidence
“demonstrat[es] that there is a long history of courts making petitions available to the media and
the public soon after they are received”—“rather than after it is ‘processed’”—“regardless of
20
40897023v.1
whether such courts use paper filing or e-filing systems.” Courthouse News Serv. v. Planet, 2016
WL 4157210, at *12-13 (C.D. Cal. May 26, 2016).
55. Applying the “experience and logic” test, courts across the nation have recognized
the existence of a qualified First Amendment right of access that attaches to non-confidential civil
petitions upon their receipt by a court. See, e.g., Courthouse News Serv. v. Schaefer, 2 F. 4th 318,
328 (4th Cir. 2021); Planet III, 947 F.3d at 589; Courthouse News Serv. v. New Mexico Admin. Off.
of Cts (“New Mexico AOC”), 53 F.4th 1245, 1266–69 (10th Cir. 2022); see also Courthouse News
Serv. v. O’Shaughnessy, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48712 (S.D. Ohio 2023) (“This case law and
Courthouse News’ evidence that state and federal courts throughout the nation and Ohio have
traditionally provided access to petitions on receipt, lead the Court to conclude that petitions have
been traditionally accessible to the public and press.”); Courthouse News Serv. v. Forman, 2022
WL 2105910, at *5 (N.D. Fla. June 10, 2022) (“under the experience and logic test, a qualified
First Amendment right of access applies to non-confidential civil complaints”); and Courthouse
News v. Jackson, 2009 WL 2163609, at *5 (S.D. Tex. July 9, 2009) (“there is a presumption in
favor of public access to judicial records.”).
56. Accordingly, the First Amendment provides the press and public with a
presumptive right of access to newly filed civil petitions that attaches when the petition is filed,
i.e., when it is submitted to the court.
C. Defendants’ No-Access-Before-Processing Policy Infringes Upon Courthouse News’

First Amendment Rights.
57. Where the qualified First Amendment right of access attaches to a particular court
process or document, as it does with new civil petitions, the right attaches upon the court’s receipt
of the document, and the press and public generally have a right of contemporaneous access. See,
e.g., New Mexico AOC, 53 F.4th at 1269 (“[A] necessary corollary of the right to access is a right
21
40897023v.1
to timely access.”); Planet III, 947 F.3d at 588, 591 (holding the qualified right of access to newly
filed civil actions attaches when the lawsuit is filed, i.e., when it is received by the court);
Courthouse News Serv. v. Jackson, 2009 WL 2163609, at *4 (S.D. Tex. July 20, 2009) (“In light
of the values which the presumption of access endeavors to promote, a necessary corollary to the
presumption is that once found to be appropriate, access should be immediate and
contemporaneous.”); Courthouse News Serv. v. Tingling, 2016 WL 8505086, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec.
16, 2016); Schaefer, 440 F. Supp. 3d at 559 (the public and press have a “contemporaneous right
of access” to newly filed civil actions—meaning “on the same day as filing, insofar as
practicable”).
58. Turning to the second analytical step of a claim alleging a violation of the First
Amendment right of access, after the court determines the right of access attaches to a particular
record or proceeding, a presumption of access arises that may be restricted only if “closure is
essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest.” Press-Enterprise
II, 478 U.S. at 13-14; accord Planet III, 947 F.3d at 596; Bernstein, 814 F.3d at 144; Schaefer, 440
F. Supp. 3d at 559-60. Here, Defendants’ policies are not essential to preserve higher values and
are not narrowly tailored.
59. Since Texas’ adoption of e-filing, access delays have become pervasive in district
courts across the state. The District Clerk Defendants do not use the Press Review Tool or
otherwise make newly e-filed civil petitions available upon receipt by the statewide e-filing
system. Instead, they effectively seal the petitions while they sit in a database—the EFM—
allowing access only after court staff have processed them. As a direct result, these District Clerk
Defendants withhold access to anywhere from twenty percent to ninety percent of the new civil
petitions e-filed until at least the day after they were e-filed, and sometimes longer.
22
40897023v.1
60. These access delays at the respective district courts for the District Clerk
Defendants are unnecessary and easily avoidable. Defendants need only implement the Press
Review Tool readily available through the OCA’s contract with Tyler.
61. Processing new petitions is not the problem. All e-filing courts must conduct some
administrative processing of new filings. As was the case in the paper world, access in e-filing
courts is delayed only if courts withhold new civil petitions until after court staff complete
administrative processing. Because most courts do not complete these clerical tasks for all the
day’s new civil actions on the day of filing, no-access-before-processing policies prevent the press
and public from learning about a substantial percentage of new civil petitions until at least the day
after filing, at which point the information is old news and less likely to capture the public’s
attention.
62. Courts that provide access to new e-filed petitions as they are received, regardless
of whether court staff have completed clerical processing, include nearly all federal district courts
and state courts in Alabama, Arizona, California (nearly all e-filing courts, covering 85% of the
state’s population), Connecticut, Florida, Georgia (courts in Atlanta metropolitan area), Hawaii,
Nevada (in the state’s biggest court in Las Vegas), New York, Ohio (Cleveland and Columbus),
Texas (Austin), Utah, Vermont, and Washington (Tacoma).
63. The Missouri and New Mexico state courts are both currently in the process of
developing systems that, once implemented, will also provide access to new e-filed complaints as
they are received, and regardless of whether court staff have completed clerical processing. In
addition, Iowa state courts recently agreed to provide on-receipt access to new e-filed complaints
on a statewide basis.
23
40897023v.1
64. Courts use a variety of vendors to provide on-receipt access, including Tyler (which
provides the Press Review Tool available to Texas district court clerks), Journal Technologies,
Tybera, Granicus, OLIS, PeachCourt and ProWare. Other courts – including courts in Hawaii,
Washington, Connecticut, New York, Missouri, and individual superior courts in California – use
home-grown access systems developed in-house.
65. Courts provide on-receipt access through terminals at the courthouse or through a
controlled online site or, most often, both. Courts control online access to new petitions by
requiring applications from users, requiring compliance with terms of use, requiring user names
and passwords, retaining the ability to revoke approval if necessary, and, in many courts, requiring
payment of a subscription fee.
66. In Texas, and after several requests by Courthouse News, the Dallas County District
Clerk recently configured the Press Review Tool for implementation and is now providing the
same kind of pre-processing access to non-confidential civil petitions that Travis County provides.
67. Despite Courthouse News’ request, the District Clerk Defendants have not
implemented the Press Review Tool and instead continue to withhold access to new e-filed
petitions until after processing. As a result, Courthouse News continues to experience significant
delays in gaining access to new civil petitions e-filed in the district courts of the District Clerk
Defendants.
COUNT ONE – VIOLATION OF U.S. CONST. AMEND. I AND 42 U.S.C. § 1983
68. Courthouse News incorporates the allegations of Paragraphs 1-48 herein.
69. Defendants’ actions under color of state law, including without limitation their
policies and practices of withholding newly filed, non-confidential civil petitions from press and
public view until after administrative processing, and the resulting denial of timely access to new
24
40897023v.1
civil petitions upon receipt for filing, deprives Courthouse News, and by extension its subscribers,
of their right of access to public court records secured by the First Amendment to the United States
Constitution.
70. The qualified First Amendment right to access new civil petitions filed in the
district courts of the District Clerk Defendants arises the moment those petitions are filed, and
access may be restricted only if the restriction is essential to preserve an overriding government
interest and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest. For Defendants’ policies and practices to
survive Press-Enterprise II’s two-prong balancing test, Defendants “must demonstrate that (1)
‘there is a “substantial probability’ that [an overriding government interest] would be impaired by
immediate access’; and (2) ‘no reasonable alternatives exist to “adequately protect” that
government interest.’” New Mexico Admin. Off. of the Cts., 53 F.4th at 1270. Defendants cannot
satisfy either prong of this test with respect to the policies and practices alleged in this complaint.
71. Courthouse News has no adequate remedy at law to prevent or redress Defendants’
unconstitutional actions and will suffer irreparable harm as a result of Defendants’ violation of its
First Amendment rights. Courthouse News is therefore entitled to a declaratory judgment and a
preliminary and permanent injunction to prevent further deprivation of the First Amendment rights
guaranteed to it and its subscribers.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Courthouse News prays for judgment against Defendants as follows:
1. A declaratory judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 declaring Defendants’
policies and practices that knowingly affect delays in access to newly filed civil unlimited
petitions, including, inter alia, their policy and practice of denying access to petitions until after
administrative processing, are unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the
25
40897023v.1
United States Constitution because these policies and practices constitute an effective denial of
timely public access to new civil petitions, which are public court records to which the First
Amendment right of access applies;
2. A preliminary and permanent injunction against Defendants, including their agents,
assistants, successors, employees, and all persons acting in concert or cooperation with them, or at
their direction or under their control, prohibiting them from continuing their policies and practices
that deny Courthouse News timely access to new non-confidential civil petitions, including, inter
alia, their policy and practice of denying access to petitions until after administrative processing;
3. As to the District Clerk Defendants only, an award of costs and reasonable
attorneys’ fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (Courthouse News does not seek same against
Defendant LaVoie); and
4. All other relief the Court deems just and proper.
26
40897023v.1
Date: July 5, 2024 Respectfully submitted,
JACKSON WALKER L.L.P.
By /s/ Matt Dow

: Matt Dow
Attorney-In-Charge
Texas Bar No. 06066500
[email protected]
100 Congress Avenue, Suite 1100
Austin, Texas 78701
Telephone: (512) 236-2000
Facsimile: (512) 236-2002
John K. Edwards
Texas Bar No. 24002040
[email protected]
1401 McKinney, Suite 1900
Houston, Texas 77010
Telephone: (713) 752-4200
Facsimile: (713) 752-4221
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that service of the foregoing document will be accomplished through the
notice of electronic filing in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on this the 5th
day of July, 2024.
/s/ Matt Dow

Matt Dow
27
40897023v.1
Case 4:24-cv-00368-SDJ Document 10-1 Filed 07/05/24 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 62
Exhibit 1
0368-SDJ Document 10-1 Filed 07/05/24 Page 4 of 4
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 3
Exhibit 4

30 N. Raymond, Third Floor, Pasadena CA 91103, (626) 577-6700, [email protected]
May 31, 2024
Gloria Marinez
District Court Clerk
Bexar County District Court
100 Dolorosa
San Antonio, TX 78205
Dear Ms. Martinez,
As the editor of Courthouse News Service, I am writing to make a simple and

respectful request. Can we in the press corps see new civil petitions when they are
received by your office.
I make this request under the overarching power of the First Amendment of the
U.S. Constitution. Enforcing that first right in the Bill of Rights, a series of federal
court rulings have established that the right of access to new civil complaints -
which regularly make news - attaches when they are received.
In addition, your office is in an excellent position to comply with the right of access.
At its fingertips, your office has alternatives that would provide on-receipt access,
much as the clerk's office in Travis County does now.
That tradition of access when new pleadings crossed the clerk's counter was
nationwide in the days when paper was the filing medium. The tradition was best
expressed from the bench in 2022 by Eighth Circuit Judge Bobby Shepherd: "There
was a time when - and some in this room may remember it - when you took a
pleading to the courthouse and the clerk stamped it physically and it went into different
bins and it was available immediately."
That traditional access took place before docketing or what is now more generically
called processing. We are simply asking for a return to that tradition in the
electronic age - in other words, when new efiled petitions cross the electronic
counter, before they are processed.
In the national context, the federal courts - including the four U.S. District Courts in
Texas - provide press and public with access on receipt. As soon as new civil complaints
cross the virtual counter, no matter whether they are submitted after hours or on
weekends, they can be reviewed on the PACER system;
A great number of state courts also provide on-receipt access to efiled complaints,
either on a statewide basis or court by court. They include courts in Hawaii, California,
Nevada, Arizona, Washington, Utah, Ohio, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, New York,
Connecticut and Vermont. In addition, state courts in New Mexico, Iowa and Missouri
have recently agree to provide statewide access on receipt.
In the Texas context, Travis County District Court provides on-receipt access through a
"Press Review Tool" developed by Texas efiling vendor Tyler Technologies. We
understand that Dallas District Court is currently considering the Press Review Tool.
Tyler also provides a second alternative which is automatic acceptance of new non-
confidential civil filings, much like the federal system.
Most importantly, from a budgetary standpoint, these alternatives have already been
paid for by the Texas Judiciary. So a letter or a phone call to the Texas Office of Court
Administration is the extent of the effort your office would need to make, in order to
provide on-receipt access.
Please let me know within the next two weeks if you are willing to consider this
alternative. I and I believe the press corps in Texas would be genuinely appreciative if
you were to make that effort and provide access to new efiled civil petitions at the time
they are received. The result would be to strengthen public access to the courts, a
foundation stone of our great democracy.
Bill Girdner, Editor · •• • ·._·.~ - _....,_.!'..al,._...,_,.;;...._.-...

Courthouse News Service
[email protected]
us POSTAGE•M<PITI,EYBOWES
COURTHOUSE NEVIS SERVICE
30 N. Raymond Ave., Suite 310 ·~-1;;,,. ~~~!:~~~~
Pasadena, CA 91103 7'" --·11·1·,0
02 7\"i '
"'
4l'
,....0.,..,,,.
u v .o.i;ii,
°'_n
u
•. 0C' e::o:~c; 650 Ml, Y 30 2024
Gloria Marinez
Bexar County District Court
100 Dolornsa
Sar\ Antonio, TX 78205
Exhibit 5

May 31, 2024
Norma Favela Barceleau

El Paso County District Court
500 E. San Antonio, Suite 103
El Paso, Texas 79901
Dear Clerk Favela Barcelau,

Traditional access took place before docketing or what is now more generically
weekends, they can be reviewed on the PACER system.
you were to make that effort and provide access to efiled civil petitions at the time they
are received. The result would be to strengthen public access to the courts, a
Thank you,
13· ~/··;:~
Bill Girdner, Editor
[email protected]
-- ---- - - - - ----- ----

us POSTAGi:"·•PiTNEYBOWES
30 N. Raymond Ave., Suite 310

Pasadena, CA 91 103
Norma Favela Barceleau

El Paso County District Court
500 E. San Antonio, Suite 103
Ii
I
El Paso, Texas 79901 )
Exhibit 6

May 31, 2024
Loretta Cammack
Nacadoches County District Court
101 W. Main Sti Ste 120
Nacadoches, Texas 75961
Dear Clerk Cammack,
, As the editor of Courthouse News Service, I am writing to make a simple and

respectful request~ Can we in the press corps see new civil petitions when they are
nationwide in the dayswhen paper was the filing medium. The tradition was best
(::alled processing. We are simply asking for a return to that tradition in the
electronic age - in 1other words, when new efiled petitions cross the electronic
Thank you, . . ~~•~....

'Cs ~C..w=-- '
Bill Girdner, Editor \

bgird ner@co u rthousenews.com
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE Cl)

!I)
us POSTAGE•M<PITHEYBOWES
30 N. Raymond Ave., Suite 310 s

0
I
Pasadena, CA 91 I 03 1-
(/) ZIP 91103 $.
02 1n •
000 ~40
. •o
~
u. 0008034850MAY 30 2024
Loretta LammacK
Nacadoches County District Court
101 W. Main St, Ste 120
Nacadoches, Texas 75961
Exhibit 7

May 31, 2024
Patsy Perez
Nueces County District Court
901 Leopard St.
Corpus Christi, Texas 78401
Dear Clerk Perez,

Administration is the extent ofthe effort your office would need to make, in order to
Thank you,
'B~:·: '
[email protected]
(.f)
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE en
<
-I
r, 30 N. Raymond Ave., Suite 310 0
I
Pasadena, CA 91103 I--
en
Ir
u::
Patsy Perez
'
Nueces County District Court
901 Leopard St.
Corpus Christi, Texas 78401
j
_/
Exhibit 8

June 21, 2024
Joanna Staton
Bell County District Court
P.O. Box 909
Belton, Texas 76513
Dear Clerk Staton,

That fradition of access when new pleadings crossed the clerk's counter was
, A great number of state courts also provide on-receipt access to efiled complaints,
~-~
•
• ,<,!~~- _,~ ~
Thank you,
~-·--- - --.-1~
[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE en us POSTAGE"·"PITNEYBOWES

en
30 N. Raymond Ave., Suite 310 <
..J
(.)
Pasadena, CA 9 I 103 I
~
en
0::
u::
Bell County District Clerk

Joanna Staton
P.O. Box 909
Belton, TX 76513
Exhibit 9

June 21, 2024
Cassandrea Tigner
Brazoria District Court Clerk
111 E. Locust St. -
Suite 304
Angleton, Texas 77515
Dear Clerk Tigner,

was a time when - and some in this room may remember it _;_ when you took a
Thank you, (3
Bill Girdner, Editor - • - - -

[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE CJ)

CJ)
us POSTAGE •M•PITI·IEY BOWES
<1;
d
Pasadena, CA 91103 I
I-
r/)
0::
ZIP 91103 O'~
02 1n ~ u
noo ~ J.l (I
.u~
u:: 0008034850JUN 21 2024
Brazoria County District Clerk

Cassandra Tigner
111 E. Locust Street
Suite 304
Angleton, TX 77515
Exhibit 10

June 21i 2024
Gabriel Garcia
Brazos District Court Clerk
300 E. 26th St.
Suite 1200
Bryan, Texas 77803
Dear Clerk Garcia,

Nevada, Arizona, Washington, Utah, Ohio, Alabama; Florida, Georgia, New York,
Thank you,

[email protected]

Pasadena, CA 91103
Brazos County District Clerk

- - - - --~
Gabriel Garcia
300 E. 26 th Street
Suite 1200/1201
Bryan, TX 77803
Exhibit 11

June 21, 2024
Casie Walker
Burnet County District Court
1701 E. Polk St.
Suite 90
Burnet, Texas 78611
Dear Clerk Walker,

Thank you,

[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE us POSTAGE•M>PITNEfBOWES

Pasadena, CA 91103
Burnet County District Clerk

Casie Walker
1701 E. Polk Street
Suite 90
Burnet, TX 78611
Exhibit 12

June 21, 2024
Clarissa Webster
Ector District Court Clerk
300 N. Grant Ave.
Room 301
Odessa, Texas 79761
Dear Clerk Webster,

Thank you,

[email protected]
,.
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE r.J)

er;
us POSTAGE""''PITNEY BOWES
.q;
30 N. Raymond Ave., Suite 310 ..J
0
Pasadena, CA 91103
'
1-
(1)
0:::
u..
Ector County District Clerk

Clarissa Webster
300 N. Grant Ave
Room 301
Odessa, TX 79761
Exhibit 13
COURTHOUSE
.
NEWS
. . I
SERVICE
30 N; Raymond, Third Floor, Pasadena,,CA 91103, (626) 577-6700, [email protected]
June 21, 2024
Melanie Reed
Ellis District Court Clerk
109 Jackson St.
Second Floor
Waxahachie, Texas 75165
Dear Clerk Reed,

respectful request. Cari we in the press corps see new civil petitions when they are
Nevada, Arizona, Washington, Utah, Ohio, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, New York, ·
Thank you, csJO::::::G=--~

[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE us POSTAGE•M,pfft,JEYBOWES

Pasadena, CA 91103
ZIP 9 11 0 3 $
02 7W
oon
~ .dJ 0
Uo\O r
OODBD34850JUN 21 2024
Ellis County District Clerk

Melanie Reed
109 S. Jackson St.
Second Floor
Waxahachie, TX 75165
Exhibit 14

June 21, 2024
John Kinard
Galveston District Court Clerk
600 59th St.
Galveston, Texas 77551
Dear Clerk Kinard,

cross the virtual counter, no matter whether they are submitted after hours or on .
A gre·at number of state courts also provide on-receipt access to efiled complaints,
• Connecticut and Vermont. In addition, state courts in New Mexico, Iowa and Missouri
Thank you,

[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE USPOSTAGE•M<PiTNEYBOWES

Pasadena, CA 91103
Z!P 9i 103
02 7Y'/
$
• •
oo·0 6J!O
• "'
0008034850JUN 21 2024
Galveston County District Clerk

John Kinard
600 59 th St.
Galveston, TX 77551
Exhibit 15

June 21, 2024
laura Hinojosa
Hidalgo County District Court
100 N. Closner
Edinburg, Texas 78539
Dear Clerk Hinojosa,

~
~~;
Thank you,

......
- ~ .

[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS. SERVICE USPOSTAGE"·"F' THEYBOWES

1

Pasadena, CA 91103
ZIP 91103
02 7\f'/
$ QQ(U::::40
'L h \ J
OOOB034S50JUN ?l 2024
Hidalgo County District Clerk

Laura Hinojosa
100 N. Closner
Edinburg, TX 78539
Exhibit 16
COURTHOUSE· NEWS SERVICE

June 21, 2024
Jamie Smith
District Court Clerk·
Jefferson County District Court
1085 Pearl St.
Room 203
Beaumont, Texas 77701
Dear Clerk Smith,

1
I
natiohwide in the days when paper was the filing medium. The tradition was best
I .
Texas - provide press and public with access on receipt. As so.on as new civil complaints
weekends, they-can be reviewed on the PACER system.
-
- - -- - - - - - ----· - - -- ·---------
~
foundation stone of our great demo-cracy.
Thank you,

[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE us POSTAGE 1M 1PlTNEYBOWES
30 N. Raymond Ave., Suite 310 p~ ~"~d,'A~

~~ a?{';,-~"r?"'fi.f.l,;7
,,,.~-~:.::,,
Pasadena, CA 91103
Z!P 91103 ~
02 7Yi 'I" y '
rf!QQ
aU ·
t::40
0008034850JUN 21 2024
Jefferson County District Clerk

Jamie Smith
1085 Pearl Street.
Room 203
Beaumont, TX 77701
Exhibit 17

June 21, 2024
David Lloyd
Johnson District Court Clerk
204 South Buffalo Ave.
Cleburne, Texas 76033
Dear Clerk Lloyd,

counter, before they are processed.·
Thank you, ~ '"'•
Bill Girdner, Editor ~-,,_.......,.....__.lilil='"...

[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE rn

(t)
<t
Pasadena, CA 91103
dI
1-
rn
n:
u:
Johnson County District Clerk

David Lloyd
204 South Buffalo Avenue
Cleburne, TX 76033
Exhibit 18

June 21, 2024
John Gimble
McClennan District Court Clerk
501 Washington Ave.
Suite 300 Annex
Waco, Texas 76701
Dear Clerk Gimble,

I
Thank you,
\ ->'? .
!
--~~~. -.~
---
[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE Cl)

en
us POSTAGE 1M 1PITNEYBOWES
30 N. Raymond Ave., Suite 310 :5

v
Pasadena, CA 91103
'
f-
en
~
~r ~~ 10.3$ ooo.s40
u_ . 00080.34 850 JUN 21 2024.
Mcclennan District Clerk

John Gimble
501 Washington Avenue
Suite 300 Annex
Waco, TX 76701
Exhibit 19

June 21, 2024
Alex Archuleta
Midland District Court Clerk
500 N. Lorraine St.
Suite 300
Midland, Texas 79702
Dear Clerk Archuleta,

_electronic age - in other words, when new efiled petitions cross the electronic
In the Texas context, Travis County District Court provides on-receipt access thro-ugh a
M-ost importantly, from a budgetary standpoint, these alternatives have already been
Thank you,

[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE CJ)

(/)
30 N. Raymond Ave., Suite 310 5

(.)
Pasadena, CA 91103
~-
I
<J)
0:
u.
Midland County District Clerk

Alex "Lex" Archuleta
500 N. Loraine Street
Suite Number 300
Midland, TX 79702
Exhibit 20

June 21, 2024
Melissa Miller
Montgomery County District Court
P.O. Box 2985
Conroe, Texas 77305
Dear Clerk Miller,

•paid for by the Texas Judiciary. So a letter or a phone call to the Texas Office of Court
Thank you, ,f? •

l> --..
•
~.r
...•-,.,..

[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE er;

rt)
us POSTAGE"~'PITNEYBOWES
f,<1 R ~ """"""""' _.,, =~==
(.)
~-·d ~~~i7
1 ' ~ """""-tc:,Z-ef.""-' •
i-
t/'J
0::
5~ ~~ 103 $ 000.640
;:;:: 0008034850JUN 21 2024
Montgomery County District Clerk

Melissa Miller
P.O. Box 2985
Conroe, TX 77305
Exhibit 21

June 21, 2024
Stephnie Menke
Potter County District Court Clerk
P.O. Box9570
Amarillo, Texas 79105
Dear Clerk Menke,

Thank you, G
[email protected]
en USPOSTAGEIM•PJTNEYBOWES
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE en
(.)
I
~~'
Pasadena, CA 91103
~ ~f ~~10.3 $ 000.640
u. 11.11a.11111,a;-.:.i.3-:, 00080.34850 JUN 21. 2024.
Potter County District Clerk

Stephnie Menke
P.O. Box 9570
Amarillo, TX 79105
Exhibit 22

June 21, 2024
Tammy Robinson
Taylor County District Court
300 Oak St.
Suite 400
Abilene, Texas 79602
Dear Clerk Robinson,

co~rt rulings have established that the right of access to new civil complaints -
In the national context, the federai" courts - including the four U.S. District Courts in
- weekends, they can be reviewed on the PACER system.
foundation stone of our great democracy. _
.
- ~
.
Thank you,
f _.,,

[email protected]
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE r.l)

en
us POSTAGe""PITNEYBOWEs
30 N. Raymond Ave., Suite 310 :s
0
~~?..@~f>Y.m,~~
r•~..,_~•J;I
1-
t.n
0:
5lf~~ 103 $ 000.640
LL. 0008034850JUN 21 2024
Taylor County District Clerk

Tammy Robinson
300 Oak St.
Suite 400
Abilene, TX 79602
- - - -- --------

Lawsuit: Courthouse News Service v. Texas Office of Court Administration, Et Al.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lawsuit: Courthouse News Service v. Texas Office of Court Administration, Et Al.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lawsuit: Courthouse News Service v. Texas Office of Court Administration, Et Al.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 4:24-cv-00368-SDJ Document 10 Filed 07/05/24 Page 1 of 27 PageID #: 35

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE,

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PRELIMINARY AND

Defendants and LaVoie are collectively referred to as “Defendants”).

1. Plaintiff Courthouse News brings this action challenging Defendants’ practice of

local clerk staff.

workstations and process them.

with on-receipt access to new e-filed civil petitions.

and public to access new petitions irrespective of processing status.

petitions until after completion of clerical processing.

7. Courthouse News challenges Defendants’ policy and practice of withholding public

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

offices of each of the Defendants.

Gould is represented by counsel who has made an appearance.

the time of receipt.

District Court at the time of receipt.

32. Defendant LaVoie, in her official capacity as Administrator of the OCA, is

Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

in concert or cooperation with them or at their direction or under their control.

FACTS AND ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

A. Courthouse News Reports Daily News From Texas Courts.

significant rulings from the federal district courts.

36. Courthouse News also publishes a freely available website at

Courthouse News’ reporters.

International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, Fox Entertainment Group, Honolulu Civil

39. Nationwide, educational institutions that subscribe to Courthouse News reports

include Boston University, Columbia Journalism Investigations, MIT School of Management,

Stanford University, University of Chicago, University of Maryland – College of Journalism,

University Law Library.

access by Defendants’ e-filing software.

have completed administrative processing.

sealed for one or more days after filing.

(“The peculiar value of news is in the spreading of it while it is fresh”).

shaped counter where the reception clerk worked.

Jackson, 2009 WL 2163609, (S.D. Tex. July 20, 2009).

historically been publicly accessible by default . . . . Logical considerations also support a

presumption of public access.”).

WL 4157210, at *12-13 (C.D. Cal. May 26, 2016).

favor of public access to judicial records.”).

i.e., when it is submitted to the court.

C. Defendants’ No-Access-Before-Processing Policy Infringes Upon Courthouse News’

presumption is that once found to be appropriate, access should be immediate and

contemporaneous.”); Courthouse News Serv. v. Tingling, 2016 WL 8505086, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec.

are not narrowly tailored.

Texas (Austin), Utah, Vermont, and Washington (Tacoma).

home-grown access systems developed in-house.

payment of a subscription fee.

COUNT ONE – VIOLATION OF U.S. CONST. AMEND. I AND 42 U.S.C. § 1983

68. Courthouse News incorporates the allegations of Paragraphs 1-48 herein.

guaranteed to it and its subscribers.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Courthouse News prays for judgment against Defendants as follows:

1. A declaratory judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 declaring Defendants’

Amendment right of access applies;

2. A preliminary and permanent injunction against Defendants, including their agents,

3. As to the District Clerk Defendants only, an award of costs and reasonable

Defendant LaVoie); and

4. All other relief the Court deems just and proper.