Case 2:18-cv-00736-JCC Document 77 Filed 06/09/20 Page 1 of 3

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9

CHONG and MARILYN YIM et al.,

10

Plaintiffs,

ORDER

v.

11
12

CASE NO. C18-0736-JCC

THE CITY OF SEATTLE, a Washington
municipal corporation,

13
Defendant.

14
15

This matter comes before the Court on GRE Downtowner, LLC’s (“GRE”) motion for

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

leave to file a brief in support of Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 71). Having
considered the parties’ briefing and the relevant record, the Court hereby DENIES the motion for
the reasons explained herein.

I.

BACKGROUND
In August 2017, Defendant, the City of Seattle, enacted Seattle Municipal Code § 14.09,

known as the “Fair Chance Housing Ordinance.” The Ordinance generally prohibits landlords
from considering or inquiring into an applicant’s criminal history when making a rental decision.
On May 21, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging that the Ordinance violates the due
process and free speech provisions of the Washington Constitution and United States
Constitution. (Dkt. No. 1-1 at 14–18.)

ORDER
C18-0736-JCC
PAGE - 1

 Case 2:18-cv-00736-JCC Document 77 Filed 06/09/20 Page 2 of 3

1

Over the next eight months, the parties briefed dueling motions for summary judgment.

2

(Dkt. Nos. 23, 33, 48, 50.) Those motions raised significant issues of public importance, and

3

several interested third parties sought leave to address those issues in amicus briefs. (Dkt. Nos.

4

26, 28, 39, 42, 44.) The Court directed third parties to file amicus briefs no later than November

5

23, 2018. (Dkt. No. 25 at 1.) In total, eight third parties filed amicus briefs by the deadline. (See

6

Dkt. No. 49 at 2–3.)

7

After the parties and amici had fully briefed the issues raised in the motions for summary

8

judgment, Defendant moved to certify a question to the Washington Supreme Court. (Dkt. No.

9

51.) On February 5, 2019, the Court granted the motion and certified three questions. (Dkt. No.

10

54 at 2–3.) The Washington Supreme Court answered those questions one year later. (Dkt. No.

11

63.) After receiving the Washington Supreme Court’s answers, the parties sought to file limited

12

supplemental briefing. (Dkt. No. 64) The Court granted the parties’ request and ordered the

13

parties to complete their supplemental briefing by May 22, 2020. (Dkt. No. 68 at 1.)

14

GRE now moves to file one last amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs’ motion for

15

summary judgment. (Dkt. No. 71.) Defendant opposes the motion. (Dkt. No. 74.)

16

II.

17

DISCUSSION
District courts have “broad discretion” regarding the appointment of amici. Hoptowit v.

18

Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1260 (9th Cir. 1982). District courts frequently welcome amicus briefs from

19

non-parties “concerning legal issues that have potential ramifications beyond the parties directly

20

involved or if the amicus has ‘unique information or perspective that can help the court beyond

21

the help that the lawyers for the parties are able to provide.’” Skokomish Indian Tribe v.

22

Goldmark, 2013 WL 5720053, slip op. at 1 (W.D. Wash. 2013) (quoting NGV Gaming, Ltd. v.

23

Upstream Point Molate, LLC, 355 F. Supp. 2d 1061, 1067 (N.D. Cal. 2005)).

24

GRE argues that the Court should allow it to file an amicus brief because “as a landlord

25

of federally assisted housing, GRE can provide information and perspective not already provided

26

by the parties and the other amici.” (Dkt. No. 71 at 3.) The Court appreciates that perspective.
ORDER
C18-0736-JCC
PAGE - 2

 Case 2:18-cv-00736-JCC Document 77 Filed 06/09/20 Page 3 of 3

1

However, the deadline for filing amicus briefs passed a year and a half ago, (Dkt. No. 25 at 1),

2

and the parties and amici have exhaustively discussed the legal issues in this case over the course

3

of 13 briefs, (Dkt. Nos. 23, 33, 38, 39-1, 40, 42-1, 44-1, 48, 50, 69, 70, 76). The Court does not

4

need additional briefing at this time.

5

III.

6
7
8

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES GRE’s motion for leave to file a brief in

support of Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 71).
DATED this 9th day of June 2020.

A

9
10
11

John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ORDER
C18-0736-JCC
PAGE - 3