How-To: Write a Motion to Unseal the Docket
| Background: | You are a party to a civil case |
| Problem: | You do not have access to the case docket |
| Solution: | You ask the Court to unseal the docket (using this walkthrough) |
I. Definitions
2. in procedure, a formal record of the proceedings in the court whose decision is being appealed.
II. Legal Citations
(B) specify the bases for obtaining access to such court records;
(C) set forth the specific legal authority for obtaining access to such court records; and
(D) contain a certification that the motion is made in good faith and is supported by a sound factual and legal basis.""
III. Samples
| # | Type | Description | ₧ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 |  | ± Pending Decision | Leon County | 2022 | TBD case. Pro Se Filing. Qui Tam. Relator. §68 FS |  |
| # | Type | Description | ₧ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 101 | | ✓ Granted | DOAH | 2016 | Attorney Filing | Public Access; Finality of Case; | |
| 102 | | ✓ Granted | DOAH | 2015 | Attorney Filing | Public Access; Finality of Case; | |
| 103 | | X Denied | DOAH | 2014 | Attorney Filing | Medicaid; Final Audit Report | |
| 104 | | X Denied | DOAH | 2013 | Pro Se Filing | Deposition; Florida Open Records Act | |
| 105 | | - Undetermined | DOAH | 2006 | Attorney Filing | Exhibits; Many citations | |
IV. Templates
| # | Link | Comments | ₧ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  | Leon County | Replace all placeholder tags with real data (eg "[plfName]" becomes "John Doe"). |  |
V. Application
- Standard of Review: 3-Prong Test
"(1) Requests for access to judicial branch records shall be in writing and shall be directed to the custodian. The request shall provide sufficient specificity to enable the custodian to identify the requested records. The reason for the request is not required to be disclosed."
- see Rule 2.420(m) Fla. R. Jud. Admin.- Must be in writing;
- Must be directed to the custodian; and
- Must be sufficiently specific about what records Relator needs.
- Important Quotes: Appellate Opinions
"The courts of this country recognize a general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.”"
"The judiciary has long recognized that case file documents, unless sealed or otherwise restricted by statute or court rule, are available at the courthouse for public inspection and copying. The common law right and the presumption of public access to court records ‘relate to the public’s right to monitor the functioning of our courts, thereby insuring quality, honesty, and respect for our legal system.’"
"When the United States Judicial Conference examined public access to electronic federal court records, the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC) made several assumptions to guide policy development including the following:
• There is a strong legal presumption that documents in case files, unless sealed, are public records available for public inspection and copying;
• The presumption of unrestricted public access to case files promotes public understanding of and confidence in the court system;""The public records law expressly states that "[i]t is the policy of this state that all state, county, and municipal records shall be open for personal inspection by any person." § 119.01. Accordingly, the public records law "is to be construed liberally in favor of openness, and all exemptions from disclosure are to be construed narrowly and limited to their designated purpose."... "[W]hen in doubt the court should find in favor of disclosure rather than secrecy."... The governmental agency claiming the benefit of an exemption bears the burden of proving its entitlement to the exemption... An individual's reason for requesting a public record is irrelevant."
VI. Quick Commentary
VII. Additional Resources
- Item 12.01, USNYWD's Pro Se Handbook (Sealing Records)
- AO 21-001 USFLMD
VIII. Bibliography
- In re: Continental Illinois, 732 F.2d 1303 (7th Cir. 1984)
- Lorei v. Smith, 464 So.2d 1330 (2DCA 1985)
- Microdecisions v. Skinner, 889 So. 2d 871 (2DCA 2004)
- Privacy and Access to Electronic Case Files in the Federal Courts,
- Administrative Office of the United States Courts (1999)
- Nixon v. Warner, 435 U.S. 589 (1978)
- Salvador v. Fennelly, 593 So.2d 1091 (4DCA 1992)
- Sepro Corp v. Florida, 839 So.2d 781 (1DCA 2003)
- Shevin v. Byron, 379 So.2d 633 (Fla. 1980)
- St. Petersburg v. Romine, 719 So.2d 19, (2DCA 1998)
- Tribune v. Public Records, 493 So.2d 480 (2DCA 1986)
- Warden v. Bennett, 340 So.2d 977 (2DCA 1976)
- Weeks v. Golden, 764 So. 2d 633 (1DCA 2000)
- WFTV v. Seminole, 874 So.2d 48 (5DCA 2004)
IX. Conclusion
With the use of the templates (as well as the samples above), you can more easily ask your court to unseal the record.
...POINTS & THINGS...
Please get the justice you deserve.
Sincerely,
www.TextBookDiscrimination.com
