9th Conference on Privacy & Public Access to Court Records (Conference Documents)

Dates:  October 14-15, 2013  (Welcome Reception the evening of October 13th, open to all registrants)

Location: William & Mary Law School, McGlotlin Courtroom, Williamsburg, VA

Conference Documents

State Policy Updates – Facilitator:  Hon. John Dooley, Supreme Court of Vermont

This session will examine state experiences in developing and implementing new court records privacy and access policies, featuring recent developments in Florida, New Hampshire, Hawaii, Nebraska, and Iowa. In addition, the Federal Public Access to Court Records (“PACER”) system enables registered users to access electronic federal court documents remotely for a per-page fee. The second half of this session will explore the extent to which states are following the PACER model and review challenges to implementing PACER-like access systems at the state level.

�Administrative Rule 41


�Appendix H - Rule 3.4 - Confidential Information Form


ND Electronic Document Access Agreeement


Nebraska Confidential Information


Public Access to Court Electronic Records in the Age of e-filing


Rule 3.4 Privacy Protection for Filings Made with the Court


Rule 3.5 Electronic Filing in District Courts


Standards for Access to Electronic Court Records


State Policy Update - Justice Cassel


Social Security Numbers in Federal Court


US Code Annotated


Justice Dooley Presentation


Why Charge:  Remote Access to Court RecordsFacilitator:  Alan Carlson, CEO, Orange County Superior Courts

As courts struggle to develop and implement records access policies and processes, the question of “why charge” is under-examined. Once records are digitized, the cost of access is low. Yet most courts maintain a policy of charging fees for access that exceed costs. Should courts profit from access fees? What should access fees be used for? To pay for remote-access technology? To protect privacy? How do different “charging rationales” impact the kinds of documents courts make available and access formats? And, should the motive of the records requestor impact the fee analysis?


Privacy, Technology, and the Trial JudgeFacilitator:  Hon. Paul Anderson, Supreme Court of Minnesota

Trial judges increasingly face a host of technologies that affect litigant (and non-litigant) privacy in the conduct of trials – impacting evidentiary practices, court decorum, and public access norms. This session will offer practical advice for judges in managing technology in the courtroom.

�JuryScope Powerpoint Presentation


PA - May 30, 2012 Decorum Order Governing Jury Selection and Trial


PA - June 4, 2012 Order and Memorandum amending May 30 order


PA - June 21, 2012 Order regarding decorum and charge to the jury


Public Records and Privacy at Thomson Reuters


Public Access to Court Records, Jerry Sandusky and Other Interesting Issues


The Right to ForgetFacilitator:  Rebecca Green, William & Mary Law

With digital breadcrumbs traveling behind every modern citizen, a growing international movement seeks to impose upon data keepers an obligation to erase data. This “right to forget” has real implications for courts. This session will explore the contours of the right to forget. Should courts have a duty to remove records to protect a “right to forget”?  Does Congress (or state legislatures) have authority to impose it?

�Big Data in Small Hands


The Atlantic – Obscurity:  A Better Way to Think About Your Data Than ‘Privacy’


Abuse Prevention Orders and PrivacyModerator: Rebecca Green, William & Mary Law

Abuse prevention orders contain a great deal of sensitive personal information. Abuse prevention orders started as civil actions only between individuals bound in marriage or other intimate relationship. Today, most states have added the availability of protection orders to other claims, for example stalking an elderly/disabled person abuse. Protection orders are also sometimes appended to probation conditions. This session will look at different state approaches to protecting litigant privacy in the abuse prevention context with comment from court administrators and abuse and privacy advocates.

FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) Overview from the US Department of Education


Limits on Internet Publication of Protection Order Information


NNEDV (National Network to End Domestic Violence) "Frequently Asked Questions about US Federal Laws and Confidentiality for Survivors"


Privacy and Confidentiality






Defining the File:  What IS a Court Record and What Can the Public Access? – Moderator:  Robert Deyling, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts

This session will explore evolving notions about the contents of “the record” of a judicial proceeding. The logical starting point for this discussion may be the definition of “court record” set forth in Section 3.10 of the COSCA/CCJ Guidelines for Public Access to Court Records. Additional baseline reference points for this discussion include case law that further defines “the record” to which the presumption of public access should apply.

Empirical Research Icon of Transcription of Panel 6  Defining the File Transcription of Panel 6 Defining the File (96.5 KiB)

Criminal Records PrivacyModerator:  The Hon. Larry Smukler, Associate Justice, New Hampshire Superior Court

This session will examine privacy in criminal court records. What right do individuals accused or convicted of crimes have to ensure accuracy of the records? What is the impact of integrated justice efforts on the privacy rights of criminal defendants? In light of expansive criminal discovery rules that protect the right of criminal defendants to a fair trial, what rights do victims and witnesses possess to ensure their privacy interests are accounted for?

Your Permanent Records�


Class Action




FCRA Violations/Problems by Background Checkers


Your Permanent Record


Summary of conference proceedings and plans for follow-up



Note: The 8th Conference on Privacy and Public Access to Court Records  documents are  available here.  

Icon of Empirical Information On State Court Trial Level Judges' Attitudes Toward CRT Empirical Information On State Court Trial Level Judges' Attitudes Toward CRT (328.1 KiB)