WMX Technologies, Inc. v. Miller

Good Law
80 F.3d 1315·96 Daily Journal DAR 3950·1996 WL 159587·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 6610·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2375
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 8, 1996No. 93-55917California8,731 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hug, J.

WMX Technologies, Inc. (“WMX”), formerly known as Waste Management, Inc., and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Waste Management of California, Inc. (“Waste Management”), appeal from the district court’s Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) dismissal of their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit against San Diego County District Attorney Edwin Miller. Miller allegedly damaged the plaintiffs’ business reputation and goodwill by preparing and disseminating a report linking the plaintiffs to organized crime. The plaintiffs sued for declaratory and injunctive relief alleging the deprivation of various property and liberty interests without due process, as well as the violation of their First Amendment rights. The district court dismissed all causes of action. We affirm the judgment of the district court.

BACKGROUND

Waste Management, a wholly-owned subsidiary of WMX, is a business which collects, stores, and disposes of solid and liquid waste. Waste Management proposed the development of a new landfill site in San Diego County, which was experiencing a “landfill crisis.” In November 1990, Waste Management filed an application with the San Diego County Board of Supervisors (“Board”) seeking the…

Concurrence in Part

Hawkins, J.

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

The majority opinion tells government officials that they may freely savage the reputation and goodwill of a citizen whose principal “sin” appears to have been a belief in the fair treatment of those who petition local government. In so doing, the majority unduly limits the reach of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , which was specifically designed to protect the property and liberty of all citizens, and misinterprets Soranno’s Gasco, Inc. v. Morgan, 874 F.2d 1310 (9th Cir.1989)’. Accordingly, I dissent from Parts 1 and 2 of the majority opinion.

I. FACTS

The appeal arrives here on the bare bones of the Complaint of Plaintiff-Appellant WMX Technologies, Inc. (“WMX”). In reviewing a dismissal for failure to state a claim, all allegations of material fact in the Complaint must be taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to WMX. Everest & Jennings, Inc. v. American Motorists Ins., 23 F.3d 226, 228 (9th Cir.1994).

The Complaint tells us that San Diego County (“the County”), wishing to attract private industry to the operation of a solid waste landfill, began a public search for a suitable landfill site and waste management contractor.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.