Lewis v. Colorado Rockies Baseball Club, Ltd.
Colorado Supreme Court
941 P.2d 266 (1997)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
Robert Lewis and Bert Matthews (vendors) (plaintiffs) sold programs and scorecards outside Coors Field (Coors), the downtown Denver home stadium of the Colorado Rockies (Rockies). The Rockies leased Coors from the Denver Metropolitan Major League Baseball Stadium District, a public entity, and thus concededly it was a government actor for First Amendment purposes with respect to Coors. The Rockies had an exclusive concession agreement with ARA Leisure Services, Inc. (Aramark) for the area inside and immediately outside Coors, and the agreement prohibited other vendors in Aramark’s exclusive concession areas. The vendors were ticketed for selling their products in certain areas near Coors, including stadium walkways and between entrance gates (disputed areas). The vendors sued the Rockies, alleging the disputed areas were public free-speech forums and the Rockies thus violated the First Amendment because the restrictions were not narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest and the vendors did not have sufficient alternative sales channels. Specifically, the vendors argued Coors was designed to be integrated with Denver’s downtown and the disputed areas generally were indistinguishable from Denver’s public streets such that the public generally would be unaware they were in a private space when in the disputed areas. The Rockies responded that (1) the disputed areas were merely ingress and egress spaces for Coors and not comparable to public streets; (2) it had significant interests in restricting the vendors from selling their products in the disputed areas, including crowd control, safety, and pedestrian movement; and (3) the vendors had ample alternative methods to sell their products at nearby public areas and bars. The vendors generally agreed that the Rockies’ asserted interests were significant but countered that the Rockies’ actions were not narrowly tailored to serve those interests because the team did not impose comparable restrictions in even more congested areas at Coors. The vendors further argued that their products were targeted to attendees at specific games, such that the Rockies’ suggested alternative channels would not be functionally equivalent to being allowed to sell in the disputed areas. The district court issued an injunction prohibiting the Rockies from limiting vendors in the disputed areas. The Rockies appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mullarkey, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.