Miscellaneous

"Almost Always"

By Anne Skove, Esq.

That's how often Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Moyer believes court records should be open to the public.

A recent press release from the court details the history of openness of records, from a Cincinnati case in 1901 to coping with the challenges of online records.

The press release seems to be an attempt to ease fears that proposed rule amendments would infringe upon the public's right to view its own records.

It could be that R. 45(B), requiring that any court records offered remotely be "identical to those available for public access" could result in fewer courts putting records online.

Here in Hamilton County, where court clerks pioneered online access, the content and availability of court records has changed depending on public outcry. Once the general public realized detailed divorce records were available, modified versions (with sensitive information such as SSNs and health insurance information blacked out) were created. Then, it seemed that more records than not were "locked" and not viewable. At some point the site was shut down altogether.

The amendments, although far from perfect, seek to help courts solve these emerging access questions. First, parties may redact personal identifiers before filing. This makes sense: if it's TMI online, maybe it's TMI in RL, too. Some of the blanks we fill in are there for no good reason. The non-public portion, however, is filed separately...why have it at all?

The other interesting provision is (D), which allows parties to make a written motion to redact portions of a record, or "if necessary, the entire court record." If the motion/petition is granted, the court must limit the information using "the least restrictive means available," such as:

• "Redacting the case information rather than limiting public access to the entire record;


• LImiting remote access to either the case record or case information while maintaining public access;


• Limiting public access to either the case record or case information for a specific period of time;


• Using initials or other identifier for the parties' proper names.

See also Public Access to Court Records: Implementing the CCJ/COSCA Guidelines, Final Project Report, Alan Carlson & Martha Wade Steketee, NCSC, 2005.

Full post as published by court-o-rama.org on February 15, 2008 (boomark / email).