« Law - Same sex marriage rulings expected | Main | Ind. Decisions - Supreme Court requires reasons for setting aside a verdict »

Wednesday, July 05, 2006

Courts - Computer Glitch Blamed by some for 'Secret Dockets' in Florida

The Daily Business Review, via Law.com, reports:

Top Florida court officials in Broward and Palm Beach counties now say that computer problems were responsible for the controversial removal of many civil court cases from the public record.

Broward Circuit Administrative Judge Thomas Lynch IV, whose own 2003 divorce was removed from public view, and Un Cha Kim, the chief operating officer of the Palm Beach County clerk's office, said last week that computer programming problems and a changeover in systems led to sealed civil cases being left off the public dockets.

The officials say their counties, which came under public criticism this spring for maintaining "secret dockets," are handling the problem differently.

"It was either one way or another," said Lynch, the administrative judge of Broward. He was referring to a computer system that was unable to seal a file while retaining it on the public record. * * *

Lynch said he thinks that all files that were taken off the public record should be returned to the public record.

After inquiries by the Miami Herald, Broward County reported 107 "super-sealed" cases -- cases that have been completely sealed -- are not part of the public record. Lynch said he had been told the computer problem has been fixed.

Broward Clerk of Courts Howard Forman was unaware of any computer glitch and was unable to confirm any before deadline. He maintained Thursday that the clerk's office was following judicial orders to seal cases when they removed them from public view. * * *

The Herald first reported the existence of secret dockets in Broward and Palm Beach counties in April. The Florida Constitution, through the Sunshine Amendments of 1992, guarantees access to the public to court and judicial records. There are exceptions, but none that allow for cases to be completely removed from the public docket, where even if a person searched for a party, no case would appear. * * *

While he didn't comment specifically on this issue, Jon Kaney, a lawyer with the First Amendment Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to maintaining open government in Florida, was skeptical that technology is to blame. Even in electronic form, the public should be able to see the case number, he said.

Another issue raised in Palm Beach County initially was "what is a court record?" Sharon Bock, clerk of the Palm Beach County courts, questioned whether names and case numbers qualified as part of the court record to be sealed.

That issue was settled in February by a 4th District Court of Appeal panel, which ruled in the case A.D. and C.D. v. M.D.M. and Sharon Bock that case numbers are not confidential information even in cases that might otherwise be confidential such as adoptions.

"The record of what cases are pending is not the file and that should never be sealed," Kaney said.

"When they take a case off the [docket], they've gone way beyond sealing a file and that goes way beyond paper or electronic," he added.

Regardless of the move to electronic records, the public should have been able to know these cases existed.

Here is a list of earlier ILB entries containing the phrase "secret docket."

Posted by Marcia Oddi on July 5, 2006 08:50 AM
Posted to Courts in general