Courts keeping cases secret
Oklahoma’s district court judges are sealing thousands of court cases and documents — mostly because attorneys simply asked them to.
More than 2,300 cases statewide have received a judge’s order to make at least one record in the file not available to the public, according to a Tulsa World analysis going back to 2003.
These records are added to a growing list of nonpublic court information, including that generated in drug courts, mental health courts and juvenile proceedings.
Records that are being sealed include financial records of companies and hospitals, settlements in wrongful-death lawsuits, divorce proceedings, protective orders and name changes.
Joey Senat, past president of Freedom of Information Oklahoma, said he was surprised by the amount of sealed records.
“I had heard of this going on in other states, but I’m really disappointed this is happening to the courts in our state,” Senat said. “This is a real indication there are two systems — one for the rich
and powerful and one for the rest of us. The public has been left out of this process.
“One thing we need to remember is that the judges who are signing those orders are elected and the court clerks are elected. If we want our records to stay open and stay available, we need to be aware of who we are electing as court clerks and judges. Open government needs to be the issue.”
The Tulsa World requested information from the state’s 77 court clerks to review the types of records and cases sealed by judicial orders since 2003.
Court Clerks Sally Howe Smith of Tulsa County, Patricia Presley of Oklahoma County and Sue Wells of Wagoner County were the only clerks able to provide lists of case numbers for analysis.
‘Red flag’
Between 2003 and 2007, Tulsa County had 204 cases with orders to seal at least one record in them. Oklahoma County had 292 such cases, and Wagoner County had two.
District Judge Gordon McAllister tops the list of Tulsa County judges who have issued orders to seal documents or cases most often, with 20 such cases. He said he doesn’t make the decisions lightly and often denies attorneys’ requests to do so.
“If there are 20 cases in five years, then there are at least 40 cases where a request has been made,” McAllister said. “I don’t keep count, but the requests come in spurts.”
Of the cases in which McAllister approved sealing a document, seven involve a hospital or nursing home as a defendant and five involve a breach of contract or agreement with a private company.
“I try to discourage attorneys if the only purpose is that their client paid a settlement and is trying to keep it from the media. That’s foolish,” McAllister said.
“If there is not a good reason, I try to talk them out of it. I tell attorneys that if you want it sealed, it will be a red flag for the press.”
Among the records sealed by McAllister, eight are settlement agreements and four are motions for a summary judgment.
McAllister said he requires the attorneys to state in open court that the seal is required to settle the case. Often, the settlement will provide for a minor, incapacitated person or victim who needs assistance as soon as possible, he said.
“I try to balance the effort of sealing the record versus the justification of requiring a trial,” McAllister said. “If the settlement seems fair and seems to provide for the person, then the lesser of two evils is to seal the records, as opposed to making it part of the record.
“I factor in the public’s need to know.”
In Oklahoma County, seven district judges have made at least 20 orders to seal a record or case — Judges Vicki Robertson, Patricia Parrish, Noma Gurich, Daniel Owens, Bryan Dixon, Carolyn Ricks and Barbara Swinton.
Gurich has approved the most orders, with 39 since 2003, followed by Parrish with 35 orders and Ricks and Swinton with 27 each.
In March, the state Supreme Court attempted to enact new rules mandating that courts and clerks keep information such as birth dates and home addresses out of public files and encouraging filers to omit references to a person’s employment history, financial information, medical records, any cooperation with the government or status as a crime victim.
A committee made up of eight court clerks and five Supreme Court staff members provided the input to create the rules.
Vocal opposition from businesses, employers and the media, which rely on public records for checking a person’s criminal history or finding other pertinent background information, led the court to suspend the implementation of the rules.
The state Supreme Court does not have data on sealed records because no rules exist to track closed documents, Michael Evans, administrative director of the courts, stated in an e-mail.
Evans had no further comment about the issue of sealed records.
Senat has criticized the closure of special courts, saying the defendants are accused of breaking the law and should be held to the same court standards as others.
“If there is no method of tracking this, how will the public ever know what is going on?” Senat asked. “This is not what our court system is supposed to do. Justice is better served when it operates in the open.”
April 13th, 2009 at 12:06 am
Nice post. Thanks for sharing these tips.