Sutliffe v. Epping Sch. Dist., No. 08-2587
In plaintiffs' section 1983 suit against various town and school officials alleging that defendants advocated for approval of budgets and spending through various channels of communication media while denying plaintiffs access to the same communication channels, the district court's judgment is affirmed where: 1) district court correctly concluded that the three added plaintiffs in the amended complaint lacked standing as they could not show any actual or imminent injury; 2) district court did not err in dismissing plaintiffs' claims besides those pertaining to the town website and the 2006 annual report on res judicata grounds based on the earlier state court action; and 3) district court's grant of summary judgment to the defendants on plaintiffs' town website free speech claim is affirmed but on the ground that the claim fails because the town defendants' actions in setting up and controlling a town website and choosing not to allow certain hyperlinks constituted government speech.
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire
Decided September 17, 2009
Before: Lynch, Chief Judge, Torruella, and Ebel, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by Lynch, Chief Judge
For Appellant: Benjamin T. King and Charles G. Douglas, III, Douglas, Leonard & Garvey PC
Diane M. Gorrow, Soule, Leslie, Kidder, Sayward & Loughman, P.L.L.C. was on brief for school appellees.