# Southcenter Joint Venture v. National Democratic Policy Committee

> Washington Supreme Court · October 19, 1989 · 113 Wash. 2d 413

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9553695

## Case

- **Full name:** Southcenter Joint Venture, Et Al, Respondents, v. National Democratic Policy Committee, Et Al, Appellants
- **Court:** Washington Supreme Court
- **Decided:** October 19, 1989
- **Citations:** 113 Wash. 2d 413; 780 P.2d 1282; 1989 Wash. LEXIS 120
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Pearson
- **Judges:** Andersen, Utter, Pearson
- **Cited by:** 109 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9553695

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting the "United States Supreme Court expressly declined to extend the `public function' doctrine to a privately owned shopping mall" and finding no "persuasive reason why this doctrine should apply any differently under our state constitution"
- rejecting, by an 8-1 majority, the suggestion that the initiative and referendum provision in that state’s constitution added anything to the state constitution’s free speech provisions
- declining invitation to drop state action requirement in favor of “balancing test,” under which court would weigh free speech interests against private property interests of mall owner

## Opinion text

Pearson, J.
(concurring in the result)—In a case analogous to the case at bench, a majority of this court recently held, "[t]he issuance of the permanent injunction by the trial court constitutes State action." Bering v. Share, 106 Wn.2d 212, 221 , 721 P.2d 918 (1986). I am persuaded that should be the law of this case as well. Nevertheless, the majority today not only fails to apply the holding in Bering v. Share, supra, but altogether fails even to acknowledge its existence.
I would hold the granting of the permanent injunction constituted state action sufficient to invoke the protections afforded by Const, art. 1, § 5. Accordingly, the balancing of Alderwood Assocs. v. Washington Envtl. Coun., 96 Wn.2d 230 , 635 P.2d 108 (1981) criteria engaged in by the concurrence properly resolves the issue at hand. Thus, I concur in the result.
Dore, J., concurs with Pearson, J.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9553695. Public record. Not legal advice.