An AP story yesterday reports that the New York State "Office of Court Administration said Wednesday it will begin posting briefs and other court documents on the Web, agreeing with a commission that the Internet provides a dramatic opportunity to expand public access to the courts. The state will also expand the posting of decisions, court calendars and docket information statewide. That information is currently available only in some New York court jurisdictions." More:
Chief Judge Judith Kaye, who appointed the commission chaired by First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams in April 2002, said paper records are becoming "obsolete" in society and electronic transmittal of information the norm.Here is the current site of the Court of Appeals, New York State's highest court.A NY Times story reports:All court records considered open to public inspection in paper form -- typically in the clerks' offices at various courts -- will eventually be posted on the Internet, Chief Administrative Judge Jonathan Lippman said.
However, the records will not contain Social Security numbers, financial account numbers, names of minor children and birth dates to protect the privacy of individuals and ward off identity thieves.
Records in both criminal and civil cases will eventually be posted on the Internet. Records in Family Court, matrimonial actions and other matters where papers are sealed will not be posted.
he New York State court system announced yesterday that it planned to begin making criminal and civil legal records available on the Internet, leaping ahead of many other states and government agencies. The project, which will be phased in over five years, includes some limitations set to protect individual rights to privacy. * * *Newsday reported yesterday, here:But briefs, criminal complaints, lawsuits and anything else that already is considered public information will be fair game, making the new policy a step beyond what has become commonplace in court systems, like the online publishing of schedules, calendars, news releases and judicial decisions, something even the New York courts do now. * * *
"This will play a significant role in making the courts comprehensible to the public," said Jonathan Lippman, the state's chief administrative judge. "We are one of the few states doing this on the individual case record basis. It's consistent with what we feel should be the openness of the courts."
Judge Lippman said the new policy most closely resembled the electronic availability of state court records in Colorado. (Its online court records have been updated daily since 2000, said Linda Bowers, the court's public access manager. She said the experience had been positive.)
Judge Lippman continued: "While the records are open now, remember they're sitting in basements in courthouses with dust all over them, and you have to go to the court and find them. That's very different from the openness and accessibility you have in the modern technological age."
New York joins a handful of states including Colorado, Delaware, Indiana, New Mexico and North Carolina that have pledged to develop universal procedures for posting court documents on the Web. A spokeswoman for the New York State Unified Court System said it would take up to five years to bring all courts online but a pilot program will start soon.What about Indiana? Indiana's proposed amendment to Administrative Rule 9 may be accessed here. In an entry dated 11/17/03 [on the old site], The Indiana Law Blog discussed access to court records in Indiana and quoted from an Indiana Supreme Court release dated 11/15/03, titled "Supreme Court Proposes New Access Rule for Court Records." It read in part:
A new Supreme Court rule on public access to court records is needed to respond to the growing use of electronic record keeping in the state's court system, Associate Justice Brent Dickson announced today. Justice Dickson chaired a Task Force that included judges, news media members court clerks and representatives of various other interested organizations that focused the changing nature of the way information is stored in today's increasingly technological society.Posted by Marcia Oddi at February 27, 2004 09:09 AM"Our task force believes the proposed rule reflects the proper balance between the rights of privacy and the public's right, and ability, to access public court records. It is the result of a many hours of frank discussions and much hard work by our task force. I truly value their dedication," said Justice Dickson.
The proposed rule is a complete rewrite of current Indiana Supreme Court Administrative Rule 9. The goal of the task force was to comprehensively address the issues of public access and privacy in court records that are likely to be maintained and distributed in electronic formats. The proposed rule is designed to be "user friendly" and is based in part on a national model adopted by the Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of State Court Administrators.
It operates on the principle that court records are public unless the information is expressly determined to be confidential. The proposed rule also encourages courts to adopt methods to enable the public to access the records from off-site and around the clock. It also specifies that certain identifying information, such as social security numbers, Personal Identification Numbers and birth dates as well as addresses and phone numbers of victims and witnesses be kept confidential.
Individuals will have until January 16, 2004 to comment on the rule. It will be become final after the Supreme Court has reviewed any comments and made any necessary changes.