Conn. Judge Grants Media Bid to Lift Secrecy Seal on Some Cases
MIDDLETOWN, Conn. (AP) -- A Superior Court judge's ruling will reveal the identities of people in more than two dozen lawsuits so secretive that their very existence could not previously be confirmed, the Hartford Courant reported Thursday.
Judge Robert E. Beach's ruling, dated last Friday, affects 27 of 40 cases that had been "super-sealed'' by Connecticut judges. The special designation removed cases from court dockets, and court clerks were not even allowed to acknowledge their existence.
"Some have suggested that sealing orders may have been motivated by unseemly factors,'' Beach wrote in his 32-page decision. "Public confidence in the integrity of the judicial branch is essential in its functioning in a free society.''
The ruling follows legal challenges filed four years ago by the Courant and the Connecticut Law Tribune. The two publications sued to get the court system to reveal the identities of people who took advantage of the judicial branch practice of "super-sealing'' cases.
The practice remained a secret until 2003, when the Law Tribune and the Courant revealed the existence of Level 1 cases involving the divorce of University of Connecticut President Philip Austin and a paternity suit against Clarence Clemons, the saxophonist for Bruce Springsteen's E Street Band.
Austin's case was unsealed in 2005 based on a request from his estranged wife's attorney. The docket for the Clemons case is among those that Beach ordered unsealed in his ruling.
That ruling would allow the public to see who was involved in the cases, but does not make public details of the cases themselves.
At one point, judicial officials acknowledged that more than 100 cases were under the special designation. In 2003, court officials voted to abolish the practice, but did not retroactively unseal any of the files.
Officials eventually unsealed most of the cases, saying they should have never been sealed, but left docket sheets for 40 others - primarily divorces, child custody matters and paternity lawsuits - for Beach to consider.
Beach ruled that docket sheets for 27 cases be released with all information intact. Parties in the cases have 20 days to appeal.
In 12 cases, Beach ordered sheets to be released with the parties' names deleted because they involve cases in which releasing the identity of the parties could compromise their safety, he said. Some of those cases involve people who sought to change their names.
Beach ordered docket sheets for two cases to remain sealed because parties claimed to be FBI informants and cannot have their names revealed. He also ruled that a child custody case since transferred to New York should remain sealed.
Attorney Daniel Klau, who represented the Law Tribune, said the judge's ruling support the point made by the media organizations from the beginning.
"The initial objective of the lawsuit was always just to get the docket sheets in the cases unredacted so we'd know who were the parties, the nature of the case and the judge who issued order to make this case disappear,'' Klau said Thursday.
Klau said a docket sheet is basically a table of contents for the lawsuit that lists the parties, the nature of the case and every document that has been filed. It also contains orders or rulings and the names of the judge or judges who issued them.
Attorney David Schulz, who represented the Courant, said "clearly the judge is trying to do the right thing here.''
Judicial branch spokeswoman Rhonda Stearley-Hebert said judicial officials would not comment on the ruling.
The state's judicial branch has been under harsh criticism by people who say Connecticut's courts are too secretive. On Wednesday, former state Supreme Court Chief Justice William Sullivan apologized to lawmakers for delaying the release of a court ruling for several weeks last year to help a potential successor win confirmation.
Sullivan was suspended for 15 days by the state Judicial Review Council and the controversy prompted Gov. M. Jodi Rell and the judicial branch to appoint twin commissions to consider judicial reforms to open the court system. The commissions' recommendations, which included better access to court dockets and programs to permit cameras in courtrooms, are being considered by lawmakers and the state's judges.
E-Mail Story
Print Story
