Bill to limit judges’ power to seal records supported

At a meeting of the Assembly Judiciary Committee, the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, the Nevada Press Association and an organization that represents trial lawyers echoed committee members in supporting Assembly Bill 519, which would establish rules for judges when they consider sealing a lawsuit from public view.

Supporters said the proposal is an important step in protecting the public from dangerous or deadly products or practices by keeping open to public view lawsuits alleging medical malpractice, product liability, defective tires or other matters.

“We support any bill, in this regard, that would expose public hazards,” Joseph Turco, a representative of the ACLU of Nevada, told the committee.

Richard Myers, a representative of the Nevada Justice Association, formerly the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association, said, “Those of us that represent those who are injured or killed … have a strong duty to expose them (dangers), and so many times our efforts are thwarted.”

Nobody spoke Friday in opposition to the bill at the first public hearing on the measure.

The committee did not vote on the measure Friday, but it must vote on it before an April 13 deadline or the proposal won’t be considered by the Assembly this year, a legislative staff member said.

Friday’s hearing was held three days after state Supreme Court Chief Justice William Maupin announced that the court plans to create a blue-ribbon commission to address the preservation, public access and sealing of court records.

Assemblyman Bernie Anderson, D-Sparks, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said committee members asked for the legislation in response to a series of Las Vegas Review-Journal stories published in February on the fact that Clark County District Court judges had sealed 115 civil cases between 2000 and late 2006.

In the articles, judges claimed to have inherent authority to seal lawsuits, but critics said keeping lawsuits from public view is generally prohibited by Nevada law.

No information is available to the public about those sealed lawsuits, but the Review-Journal was provided with the identities of litigants in each case. They include people and organizations that are wealthy or wield influence in politics, business, medicine and the courts.

Anderson said the bill addresses an issue that “many people in the community have been concerned about” and that it protects the public by keeping open lawsuits that involve a hazard of one type or another.

“Sealing (court records) can hide threats to public safety. … This legislation seeks to limit the amount of court records that are sealed,” Anderson said.

Anderson said the bill was crafted after laws in Indiana and other states and was written so that it shouldn’t interfere with the constitutional powers of the courts.

The measure would prohibit judges across the state from sealing a court record unless a “preponderance of the evidence” shows that releasing the information publicly will hurt the “public interest” or pose a danger to the public, or unless no method other than sealing a record exists to assure those safeguards.

The measure would require a judge to have a separate hearing to weigh the merits of sealing a particular court record, and the judge would be required to notify the public about the hearing beforehand and allow the public to present evidence at that hearing.

The bill also would require a judge, when sealing a court record under the set guidelines, to unseal the record at the “earliest possible time after the circumstances necessitating the sealing no longer exist.”