Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Kentucky Blogs -> Kentucky Law Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Kentucky
: Kentucky Law BlogCIVIL RULE AMENDMENTS: New Rule to Protect Privacy in Pleadings and other Court Filings of Documents
By Michael Stevens
Civil Rule 7.03 is new, new, new.
In a nutshell:
- Attorney shall redact SSN, DOB, TIN, financial account number in civil matters (DOB ok in criminal pleadings) from those documents FILED WITH THE COURT.
- Attorney is the custodian of the original.
- Court may order unredacted filed under seal.
- Not the clerk's responsibility to review the filings for compliance. Responsibility vests with counsel and party filing documents.
- Failure to comply will subject attorney to sanctions and relevant portions stricken.
Implications:
- Redacting these items from the pleadings and other prepared discovery should be straightforward. However, I have been simply not providing SSN and DOB in the discovery responses and sending that under separate cover. Now it looks like two documents one redacted and one not. TIN and other financial information arises frequently in divorce and business litigation.
- The rule includes "certain personal data identifiers" and then lists specifics. What about residences, former residences, children's names, health care providers, employers' names, etc.??? Is the "including" all inclusive or by way of example?
- What about the interrogatory asking about other civil or criminal matters which may contain personal indentifiers filed before the civil rule change?
- What about the requests for documents such as medical records, personnel records, employment records, insurance policies, etc.? Sounds like the easiest solution is not to produce for filing with the court but simply make them available for inspection or copying and sent by separate cover (copies or digital format).
- These questions only scratch the surface of the ramifications of this rule which must also be read together with the subpoena changes since many records from physicians and employers and financial institutions require personal identifiers. I will have to reread the rules regarding the filing of subpoenas and see what the risks are on these documents to avoid inadvertant filing by the sheriff of any unredeacted documents.
Make your comments on these changes and how to avoid problems.
Full post as published by Kentucky Law Blog on March 30, 2009 (boomark / email).
Copyright Lawsuits: Critical Issues Before Filing Copyright
Federa Rule 11(b) Considerations
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Legal Forms
Business and Commercial Legal Forms
Privacy Protection Act 42 USC 21A
Federal Newsroom Law
imbee Data Collection
Industrious Kid, Inc. pays $130,000 civil penalty for violating the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act.
Google Sued for Violating the Privacy Rights of Millions of Americans
Google Sued for Violating the Privacy Rights of Millions of Americans
US Army Corps of Engineers
Class action dismissed for allegedly failing to protect New Orleans from the levee breach.
Civil / Human Rights
alleging violations of basic human and civil rights.
AOL Privacy Class Action
Can Proceed
CVS Mailing
Sparks Allegations of Privacy Violation

Update on Proposed Amendments to Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Civil Rules Committee Approves Proposed Rules Amendments
Clarification Needed of Amendments to Rule 1925
Feds Post New Guidance Document
Iowa, Maryland and Nebraska Join States with Special E-Discovery Court Rules







