Also known as: rights of access · access right · right to access
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
3 senses
A First Amendment guarantee that the public and press may attend criminal trials and certain pretrial proceedings. Courts may close such proceedings only upon specific findings that an overriding interest requires closure and that the closure is narrowly tailored.
A First Amendment guarantee that the public and press may attend criminal trials and certain pretrial proceedings. Courts may close such proceedings only upon specific findings that an overriding interest requires closure and that the closure is narrowly tailored.
Rajesh Rao stands trial for fraud in a high-profile case. The prosecution asks the judge to clear the courtroom during key witness testimony to protect the witness's privacy. The judge refuses after finding no overriding interest that cannot be served by narrower measures such as sealing portions of the transcript.
In child custody and family disputes, a party's entitlement to visitation, parenting time, or contact with a child.
Raymond Ramos and his former spouse submit their custody disagreement to arbitration under the Uniform Family Law Arbitration Act. The arbitrator must decide whether Ramos receives scheduled parenting time with their child after the mother relocates across the state.
1 common questions
An implied servitude or easement that grants necessary physical access to landlocked property or to property interests conveyed or retained in a conveyance.
Roger Ramirez owns a parcel surrounded by private land with no public road connection. The city condemns a narrow strip across neighboring property to build a permanent access road. Ramirez gains the right to use the new road to reach his land.
In child custody and family disputes, a party's entitlement to visitation, parenting time, or contact with a child.
An implied servitude or easement that grants necessary physical access to landlocked property or to property interests conveyed or retained in a conveyance.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Ralph Richardson is a defendant in a criminal case. The state moves to close the preliminary hearing to protect witness identities. The court denies closure after finding no overriding interest that cannot be protected by narrower means, preserving public and press access.
2 common questions
A court may close proceedings only upon specific findings that an overriding interest requires closure and that the closure is narrowly tailored to serve that interest. Blanket or consent-based closures without such findings violate the First Amendment right of access.
No. The press receives the same right of access to criminal trials and proceedings as the public at large. Courts have rejected claims that journalists enjoy greater rights to enter prisons or other government facilities than ordinary citizens.
It refers to a party's entitlement to visitation, parenting time, or contact with a child and is treated as one of the child-related disputes that may be submitted to arbitration under the Uniform Family Law Arbitration Act.
In the late 1990s the city of New London, Connecticut, confronted severe economic decline after the 1996 closure of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, which had employed more than 1,500 people. The city's unemployment rate stood nearly double the state average and its population had dropped below 24,000 residents from a 1970 high of 30,000. State and local officials therefore designated the Fort Trumbull peninsula for targeted economic revitalization. In 1998 the New London Development Corporation, a private nonprofit entity, was reactivated to prepare a redevelopment plan covering roughly 90 acres. The plan divided the area into seven parcels designated for a waterfront conference hotel and marinas, retail and entertainment space, research and office facilities, parking and park support, residential units, a Coast Guard museum, and additional office and retail uses. The city council formally approved the plan in January 2000 and authorized the NLDC to acquire needed parcels by purchase or, if necessary, by eminent domain. Petitioners Susette Kelo, Wilhelmina Dery, and seven other owners held fifteen properties within parcels 3 and 4A; ten of those parcels were occupied by the owners or their family members and none was alleged to be blighted. After negotiations with the NLDC failed, the corporation initiated condemnation proceedings against the remaining properties in November 2000. In December 2000 the petitioners filed suit in New London Superior Court asserting that the proposed takings violated the public-use limitation of the Fifth Amendment. Following a seven-day bench trial the Superior Court entered a permanent restraining order barring condemnation of the parcel 4A properties but denied relief as to the parcel 3 properties. Both sides appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court, which upheld the validity of all challenged takings. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the federal constitutional question.
View caseRyan Roberts receives title to an interior parcel after a subdivision conveyance that leaves no recorded outlet. The grantor refuses to allow a driveway across retained land. Roberts claims an implied servitude by necessity to reach the public road.
In November 1969, Paul Branzburg, a staff reporter for the Courier-Journal newspaper in Louisville, Kentucky, published an article describing his observations of two individuals synthesizing hashish from marijuana in Jefferson County. The article included a photograph and stated that Branzburg had promised not to reveal the identities of the two. He was subsequently subpoenaed by the Jefferson County grand jury and refused to identify the individuals he had observed. A state trial court ordered him to answer, and the Kentucky Court of Appeals denied his petition for relief. In January 1971, Branzburg published a second article detailing drug use in Frankfort, Kentucky, based on interviews with several dozen users over two weeks. He was subpoenaed by the Franklin County grand jury to testify about violations of drug statutes. The Court of Appeals denied the requested writs and rejected his First Amendment claim. This Court granted certiorari. In July 1970, Paul Pappas, a television newsman-photographer, was assigned to cover civil disorders in New Bedford, Massachusetts, involving the Black Panthers. He entered Panther headquarters under an agreement not to disclose what he saw or heard inside except for an anticipated police raid, which did not occur. Two months later, he was summoned before the Bristol County grand jury but refused to answer questions about his observations inside the headquarters. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that he must appear and testify. In February 1970, Earl Caldwell, a New York Times reporter covering the Black Panther Party in San Francisco, received a subpoena to appear before a federal grand jury investigating possible violations of federal law by the group, including threats against the President. The District Court denied the motion to quash but issued a protective order. Caldwell refused to appear and was held in contempt. The Court of Appeals reversed, recognizing a qualified privilege. This Court granted certiorari and consolidated the cases.
View caseRhea Reynolds seeks a permit to rebuild her beachfront home. The coastal commission conditions approval on Reynolds recording a public easement allowing pedestrians to cross her property to reach the shoreline. Reynolds challenges the condition as lacking an essential nexus to the project's impact.
The Nollans own a beachfront lot in Ventura County, California. A concrete seawall approximately eight feet high separates the beach portion of their property from the rest of the lot. The historic mean high tide line determines the lot's oceanside boundary. The Nollans originally leased their property with an option to buy, and the building on the lot was a small bungalow totaling 504 square feet. The Nollans' option to purchase was conditioned on their promise to demolish the bungalow and replace it. On February 25, 1982, they submitted a permit application to the California Coastal Commission proposing to demolish the existing structure and replace it with a three-bedroom house. The Commission informed them that the permit would be granted subject to the condition that they allow the public an easement to pass across a portion of their property bounded by the mean high tide line and their seawall. On June 3, 1982, the Nollans filed a petition for writ of administrative mandamus in the Ventura County Superior Court to invalidate the access condition. The court remanded the case to the Commission for a full evidentiary hearing. After the hearing, the Commission reaffirmed the condition. The Superior Court ruled in favor of the Nollans on statutory grounds and directed that the permit condition be struck. While the Commission's appeal to the California Court of Appeal was pending, the Nollans tore down the bungalow, built the new house, and bought the property. The Court of Appeal reversed the Superior Court. The Nollans appealed to this Court, raising only the constitutional question.
View case1 common questions
A conveyance includes an implied servitude for access when the grant would otherwise leave the conveyed or retained parcel landlocked or unable to be enjoyed. The servitude arises by necessity unless the parties clearly express a contrary intent.
…a condemnation for the purpose of ensuring access to a resource to which similarly situated members of the public had a legal right of access. Likewise, in Strickley v. Highland Boy Gold Mining Co. , 200 U. S. 527 (1906), the Court upheld a condemnation establishing an aerial right-of-way for a bucket line operated by a mining…