« Ind. Gov't. - More on the toll road and the ruling | Main | Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit issues three Indiana decisions [Updated] »
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Ind. Courts - "Casino court records should not be sealed"
From the Bloomington Herald-Times editorial today, titled "Casino court records should not be sealed: Legislature has established that such documents are public, and case has not been made otherwise":
The decision by Orange Circuit Judge Larry Blanton to seal the court files in the civil dispute between the companies involved in building a casino in the French Lick-West Baden area is mystifying.The first lawsuit was filed early this month by Bloomington-based Cook Group Inc. against Lauth Resorts and Casinos LLC. The two businesses have joined forces to do what looks to be a magnificent, region-rejuvenating development project.
This week, Lauth sued Cook. Court documents in both cases have been sealed by the judge.
These records should not be sealed.
Court records in Indiana generally are open to the public for inspection. At times, judges seal files, as in the criminal case involving the death of Jill Behrman. The judge in that case has said release of documents in that file could jeopardize finding out who killed Jill, and could keep the defendant from getting a fair trial.
We still believe Indiana state law requires one specific record in that case to be made public, but that's another case altogether.
In the casino case, we see no justification for sealing the court filings. Just what public interest is served?
There is obvious public interest in construction of a casino in Orange County. It's been the object of heated community interest for more than a decade, and was the focus of a county referendum in November 2003.
Thousands of jobs and the hopes of economic revival for an entire part of the state are at stake. Public roads and services will be affected. There are major tax implications for the region and the state.
Perhaps a case could be made that a particular document, if it included a trade secret or confidential financial information for example, should be kept from public view. But the Indiana General Assembly has established the presumption that court records are public matters, and the general facts of this dispute should be as well.
The beginning of the law governing access to public records states in part:
"… (I)t is the public policy of the state that all persons are entitled to full and complete information regarding the affairs of government and the official acts of those who represent them as public officials and employees. Providing persons with the information is an essential function of a representative government and an integral part of the routine duties of public officials and employees, whose duty it is to provide the information. This chapter shall be liberally construed to implement this policy and place the burden of proof for the nondisclosure of a public record on the public agency that would deny access to the record … ."Judges are government officials.Courts are government offices.
Court documents are public records. They should not be sealed without good reason, and in this case, no good reason has been produced, nor is anywhere to be seen.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 21, 2006 09:22 AM
Posted to Ind. Trial Ct. Decisions