Steven Blomquist v. Town of Marana
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs Steven Blomquist and Sharyl Cummings appeal from the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Town of Maraña and several of its police officers. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the history of this case, we need not recount it here.
I
The district court correctly determined that Plaintiffs’ claims against the Town of Maraña (“the Town”) failed as a matter of law because they lacked a federal constitutional right to picket on the abandoned easement site. At the time of the events giving rise to this suit, the Town Council had abandoned any public right or interest in the easement. Plaintiffs have not challenged that abandonment in this case, and no court has held that the abandonment was improper. The parties have informed us that their settlement of the separate state litigation on that question does not involve a determination that the abandonment was illegal or void.
Given that factual context, Plaintiffs cannot establish “general rights of free speech on property privately owned and used non-discriminatorily for private purposes only.” Lloyd Corp., Ltd. v. Tanner,…