Law360 is providing free access to its coronavirus coverage to make sure all members of the legal community have accurate information in this time of uncertainty and change. Use the form below to sign up for any of our weekly newsletters. Signing up for any of our section newsletters will opt you in to the weekly Coronavirus briefing.
Sign up for our Media & Entertainment newsletter
You must correct or enter the following before you can sign up:
Thank You!
Law360 (September 17, 2020, 2:43 PM EDT ) Movie theater owners and their trade associations have ended their federal suit against New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy and the state health commissioner over the monthslong mandatory shutdown of cinemas in the Garden State amid the coronavirus outbreak after Murphy allowed theaters to reopen on a limited basis.
With the consent of the AMC theater chain, its fellow plaintiffs and the state officials, U.S. District Judge Brian R. Martinotti on Thursday entered an order administratively terminating the action "without prejudice to any party's right to make a letter request to restore this matter to the active docket at the appropriate time."
The order comes a day after state Assistant Attorney General Daniel M. Vannella notified the judge in a letter that the parties were on board for the administrative termination. Vannella noted that the agreement came after Murphy on Sept. 1 issued an executive order allowing movie theaters and similar venues to open their indoor spaces to the public on Sept. 4.
Among other restrictions, that directive requires that a particular movie showing be limited to 25% capacity, excluding staffers, "but regardless of the capacity of the room, such limit shall never be larger than 150 persons."
Patrons who buy or reserve tickets together may sit together, but they must be six feet away from other groups or individuals, the order states. With certain exceptions, moviegoers also must wear masks unless they are eating or drinking, the order states.
The governor signed the executive order — which also permitted indoor dining to resume in the state, among other things — two weeks after Judge Martinotti on Aug. 18 denied the plaintiffs' bid for a preliminary injunction lifting the state-ordered closure of movie theaters.
The judge concluded that the state officials presented valid reasons for keeping cinemas shuttered while allowing similar venues like churches to be open.
By closing indoor movie theater operations, Murphy and state Health Commissioner Judith Persichilli "are promoting the significant governmental interest of protecting public health by keeping closed areas that present heightened risks for COVID-19 transmission," Judge Martinotti said in his opinion.
The plaintiffs also include the National Association of Theatre Owners, the National Association of Theatre Owners of New Jersey, Cinemark USA Inc., Regal Cinemas Inc., BJK Entertainment Inc., Bow Tie Cinemas LLC and Community Theaters LLC.
In their July 6 lawsuit against Murphy and Persichilli, the theater owners and trade associations raised free speech and equal protection claims in challenging how cinemas in the state were forced to remain closed while places of worship and other facilities were allowed to open their doors to the public.
About a week later, Judge Martinotti on July 14 denied the plaintiffs' request for a temporary restraining order to immediately block the state officials from enforcing orders to keep theater doors closed during the pandemic. The judge said the cinema owners and trade groups didn't meet "the stringent standard for granting this extraordinary relief."
In his subsequent preliminary injunction opinion, Judge Martinotti credited the state officials' reasons for treating movie theaters differently from houses of worship and other venues.
Murphy and Persichilli had said that enforcing a mask mandate is easier at a religious service than it would be during a movie in a dark theater, and that it takes worshipers less time to briefly remove masks as part of their service than it does for moviegoers to remove masks to consume food and beverages. They also cited the "prolonged" nature of the moviegoing experience.
The officials "have presented conceivable justification that keeping movie theaters closed while opening churches, shopping malls, and libraries is rationally related to the goal of stopping the transmission of COVID-19," the judge said.
The state attorney general's office and the cinema owners and trade associations declined to comment Thursday.
The plaintiffs are represented by Geoffrey S. Brounell, Robert Corn-Revere, Janet Grumer, Martin L. Fineman and John D. Freed of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP.
Murphy and Persichilli are represented by Daniel M. Vannella, Deborah A. Hay, Bryan Edward Lucas, Robert J. McGuire, Jessica Jannetti Sampoli and Michael R. Sarno of New Jersey's Office of the Attorney General.
The case is National Association of Theatre Owners et al. v. Murphy et al., case number 3:20-cv-08298, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
--Editing by Orlando Lorenzo.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
