Posted: October 9, 2011
Code of Judicial Administration
CJA 04-0202.02. Records classification. Amend. Modifies records to be classified as sealed, private or protected. Identifies record series by casetype to be classified as sealed or private.
CJA 04-0202.04. Request to access a record associated with a case; request to classify a record associated with a case. Amend. Moves from Rule 4-202.02 to this rule descriptions of records that require judicial approval to classify as non-public.
CJA 04-0202.09. Miscellaneous. Amend. Requires a person filing a record with the court to identify the record as non-public if it qualifies as non-public.
CJA Appendix I. Summary of Classification of Court Records. New. Summarizes the classification of record series by casetype.
CJA_Appx_I.pdf
When the appendix classifies Administrative agency appeals as public, it fails to consider that pursuant to 20 U.S.C. 1415, a parent of a student with disabilities may use the state appeal process to do it, and those appeals are confidential and include documents and exhibits that are expressly protected from disclosure without consent by federal law.
The proposed changes to CJA 04-0202.02 suggest that adoption files are “private” until sealed at the end of the adoption process. I note that UCA 78B-6-141 appears to make adoption files “sealed” from filing. This amendment was made in 2009.
I write in support of adding family law cases (divorce, parentage, child support, protective orders and stalking injunctions) as private cases, except for case history, final judgment, letters of appointment and record of public hearings. Although there has been a good deal of progress in the last several years to remove financial information(account name and numbers) and private information (SS #, birth dates) that would be a gold mine for identity theft, many practitioners and pro se litigants still include such information in pleadings. Therefore, this uniform categorization as “private” for family law cases will help to protect truly private information without compromising the public’s right to do research and have knowledge of final determinations in these matters. This is an excellent example of achieving a good balance between privacy of individuals and keeping their financial information safe AND the public’s right to know what happens in judicial proceedings.
I applaud the proposed changes to CJA 4-202.02, and in particular, adding (4)(B)(ii) relating to civil stalking injunctions (making them private) and removing (4)(M) Guardianship and Conservatorship cases (making them public).
However, the Table in Appendix I seems inconsistent with respect to a guardianship or conservatorship case. Removing those cases as “private” but then listing them in the Table as “private” is inconsistent.
I’m pleased to see that family law cases will be deemed private by this amendment. Pleadings in these types of cases are often full of confidential and private information which should be protected.