§Why CasetextPricing

Hepting et al v. AT&T Corp. et al

MOTION to Intervene Notice of Motion and Motion for Leave to Intervene; Notice of Motion and Motion to Unseal Documents

31 Cited authorities

  1. Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc.

    435 U.S. 589 (1978)   Cited 6,004 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "business information that might harm a litigant's competitive standing" can constitute a sufficient reason to preserve records under seal

  2. Elrod v. Burns

    427 U.S. 347 (1976)   Cited 4,216 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that local government could not constitutionally base public employment opportunities on political affiliation or nonaffiliation

  3. Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court of California

    464 U.S. 501 (1984)   Cited 1,763 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that media have a right of access to voir dire

  4. Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

    331 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 3,348 times
    Holding that the Phillips exception is "expressly limited to the status of materials . . . attached to a non-dispositive motion"

  5. Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia

    448 U.S. 555 (1980)   Cited 1,645 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that criminaltrials must be open to the public

  6. Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court

    457 U.S. 596 (1982)   Cited 1,468 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that safeguarding well-being of minor is compelling and may justify closure of criminal trial from public access

  7. Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court

    478 U.S. 1 (1986)   Cited 1,214 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a criminal proceeding may be closed to protect the accused's right to a fair trial only if doing so is "narrowly tailored to serve that interest," meaning that "there is a substantial probability that the defendant's right to a fair trial will be prejudiced by publicity that closure would prevent" and that "reasonable alternatives to closure cannot adequately protect the defendant's fair trial rights" (quoting Press-Enter. Co. v. Superior Ct., 464 U.S. 501, 510, 104 S.Ct. 819, 78 L.Ed.2d 629 (1984) )

  8. Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart

    427 U.S. 539 (1976)   Cited 1,428 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the record [was] lacking in evidence to support" a finding that alternative "measures might not be adequate"

  9. Phillips v. General Motors Corp.

    307 F.3d 1206 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 2,232 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the party or intervenor “seeking protection bears the burden of showing specific prejudice or harm will result if no protective order is granted”

  10. New York Times Co. v. United States

    403 U.S. 713 (1971)   Cited 861 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim of potential harm to national security does not provide the executive branch with unconstrained authority to override the freedom of the press