While a great deal of public attention was focused on the O.J. Simpson case, an appellate court--and later the California Supreme Court--issued broad rulings on public access to the  courts in another case, NBC Subsidiary (KNBC-TV) v. Superior Court.  In this case, the appellate court held that the press and public have a right to attend civil trials as well as criminal trials, overturning a number of restrictions that had been imposed on the press and public during a trial pitting actor Clint Eastwood against his former lover, actress Sondra Locke.  Among other restrictions overturned by the appellate court was one requiring the courtroom to be cleared of everyone except trial participants during every break when the jury was not present.

     The California Supreme Court ruled on the NBC Subsidiary case in mid-1999--and recognized a broad constitutional right of the press and public to attend civil court proceedings as well as 
criminal proceedings.  In a sweeping decision, the state Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the First Amendment protects the right to attend civil trials.

     Writing for the court, Chief Justice Ronald George traced the tradition of open courtrooms through history and relied heavily on the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Richmond Newspapers 
v. Virginia decision in concluding that there is a constitutional right to attend civil court proceedings.  Although Richmond specifically affirmed the public's right to attend only criminal 
trials, George noted that there are strong public policy reasons to recognize a similar right in civil cases.  "(T)he public has an interest, in all civil cases, in observing and assessing the performance of its public judicial system, and that interest strongly supports a general right of access in ordinary civil cases," George wrote.

     In addition to the constitutional considerations, the court relied on Section 124 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which was enacted in 1872, in reaching its decision.  The Supreme 
Court said that under both the First Amendment and this statute, judges must carefully consider each civil courtroom closure.

     The court held that before a judge can close a civil proceeding to the press and public, he or she must take a series of steps.  First, the judge must provide public notice that a courtroom closure is being considered.  Then the judge must hold a hearing before closing "substantive" court proceedings or sealing transcripts.  At this hearing, the judge must find:  1) that there is an overriding interest  to justify the closure, 2) that the closure is as narrowly focused as possible, and 3) that there is no less restrictive means of protecting the integrity of the proceedings.

     Several media lawyers praised the NBC Subsidiary decision as the most decisive affirmation of the right of the press and public to attend civil court proceedings ever handed down by any state's highest court.  It will surely have a major impact in other states as well as California, making it much more difficult for judges to justify closing civil court proceedings.