Jane Fonda v. L. Patrick Gray, Etc., Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York and City National Bank, Defendants

707 F.2d 435 Jane FONDA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. L. Patrick GRAY, etc., et al., Defendants, Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York and City National Bank, Defendants- Appellees. No. 79-3451. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Oct. 8, 1982. Decided June 3, 1983. John T. McTernan, Margolis, McTernan, Scope, Sacks & Epstein, Leonard I. Weinglass, Los Angeles, Cal., Mark Rosenbaum, ACLU Foundation of Southern Cal., Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant. John Hill, Hill, Genson, Even, Crandall & Wade, Los Angeles, Cal., for City Nat. Bank. James W.B. Benkard, Charles R. Morgan, Richard J. Cunningham, John F. Barry, III, Davis, Polk & Wardwell, New York City, Stanley H. Williams, Agnew, Miller & Carlson, Los Angeles, Cal., for Morgan Guar. Trust Co. of N.Y. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before KENNEDY, ANDERSON and PREGERSON, Circuit Judges. J. BLAINE ANDERSON, Circuit Judge: 1 Jane Fonda appeals the award of summary judgment in favor of Morgan Guaranty Trust Company and City National Bank. Ms. Fonda contends that there was a genuine issue of fact concerning the existence of a…

Jane Fonda appeals the award of summary judgment in favor of Morgan Guaranty Trust Company and City National Bank. Ms. Fonda contends that there was a genuine issue of fact concerning the existence of a conspiracy between the defendant banks and the FBI which had the effect of violating her First and Fourth Amendment rights. We disagree.

I. BACKGROUND

On October 18, 1973, Ms. Fonda commenced this action against 20 past or then present United States Government officials, Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York and City National Bank of Los Angeles. The complaint alleged a wide-ranging conspiracy designed to suppress Fonda’s outspoken political views, particularly those opposed to the Vietnam War and the Nixon Administration. Fonda’s claims were based on the First, Fourth, Fifth and Ninth Amendments to the Constitution; 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 , 2510-20; 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 (3), 1986; and 47 U.S.C. § 605 .

City National moved for summary judgment in June of 1978, the district court granting the motion in November. In May of 1979, the trial judge approved a settlement between Fonda and the government defendants. That same month, Morgan Guaranty’s motion for summary judgment was…

dissenting:

I dissent. A careful reading of the record causes me to conclude that there are genuine fact disputes bearing on the question of conspiratorial conduct on the part of Morgan Guaranty and City National Bank. Therefore, I do not think that it was proper to dispose of the case on summary judgment.