Stacie C. Bering, Respondents v. Share, Appellants (Washington 1986)

Summary

The court upheld the injunction’s geographic restriction under the federal and Washington constitutions, concluding that the picketers’ conduct obstructed access to a medical facility and that the restriction served compelling state interests while leaving alternative channels open. It held that the oral-language restriction was permissible only when children of an age the trial court determines to be vulnerable are present, and remanded for that narrowing; it also affirmed the contempt findings and related fee award. Chief Justice Dolliver concurred in upholding the place restriction on the narrower ground of preserving access to health care; Justices Dore and Andersen dissented from upholding that restriction, and Justice Dore also opposed the content restriction.

Holding

Evidentiary support for the injunction. The trial court’s findings were supported by substantial evidence and would not be disturbed.

Geographic restriction under the federal First Amendment and Washington Constitution. The restriction limiting picketing to the public sidewalk north of the bus stop on Stevens Avenue did not violate federal or state free-speech protections.

Oral content restriction under the federal First Amendment and Washington Constitution. The restriction on oral use of the specified words could stand only when children of an age selected by the trial court were present at the picket site; it was overbroad insofar as it applied when no such children were present and had to be narrowed on remand.

Contempt orders for violation of the geographic restriction. The contempt findings were affirmed because the contemnors were found to have violated the valid geographic restriction, not the content restriction.

Attorney fees and costs assessed against two contemnors. The award of $7,000 in attorney fees and $1,200 in costs was affirmed.

Stacie C. Bering, Respondents v. Share, Appellants

Summary

Holding

Cited authorities

Cited by