THANK YOU TO R. FRED LEWIS !!!!!!!!!

Opening up hidden cases
By A TIMES EDITORIAL
Published April 10, 2007


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Credit should go to Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice R. Fred Lewis for jumping on the issue of hidden cases and secret dockets when it first emerged in the media last year. Lewis told the Miami Herald that when he learned that cases were being removed from the public docket, essentially wiping away any trace of their existence, he "almost swallowed" his tongue. Then he took action. The results are a set of new rules issued Thursday for civil cases that will curb the practice of hiding cases and make it harder to seal court records from public view.

Much about the changes are to be applauded. The new rules establish a needed statewide standard for handling requests that court records be sealed. And they assert a strong presumption of openness. But ultimately they don't go far enough in protecting the right of public access.

The good news is that the rules, unanimously adopted by the Florida Supreme Court after input from a wide range of legal professionals, state unequivocally that removal from public view of all information that indicates a case existed is prohibited. Civil cases can no longer just disappear from the docket. There has to be at least a case number or docket number retained and available to the public. That way, if someone wants to challenge the confidentiality of the case, it can be found.

As to sealing documents within court cases, the court makes clear that Florida has a long and abiding commitment to keeping records accessible to the public and that the new rules are intended to further transparency and openness.

Having a public hearing before case records are sealed is the best way to balance the interests of the parties and those of the public. But the new rules only require a public hearing when sealing motions are contested by one party. In cases where the civil litigants all agree to seal the records, there is no prior notice or hearing required, although a judge can still order one.

This is concerning. Civil litigants often have an interest in trying to keep the public from knowing the details of a dispute in a messy divorce, for instance. In fact, it was an effort to pry open the divorce records of former Senate President Dempsey Barron that helped to establish the principle that Floridians should have access to court records, even embarrassing ones. When the parties agree to secrecy and present a united front to the judge, there is a legitimate worry that the interests of the public to access won't be strongly advocated.

The court suggests that the judge will act in the public interest and police these sealing requests. The rules now require specific written findings when an order to seal documents is issued, which should encourage judges not to grant secrecy without a valid basis. Still, it is not the same as having a representative of the public in the courtroom.

Another concern about the new rules is that once an order to seal documents is entered, anyone who wants to challenge the order has the burden of proving that it was inappropriately issued. The burden of proof should always be on the party seeking confidentiality.

When parties engage Florida's court system to resolve disputes, the public has a right to know. The new rules help to ensure that interest is protected, just not quite well enough.

[Last modified April 9, 2007, 21:23:25]



I still see room for abuse here. Especially with all the JEB appointees still smarming around ....