Whether it is true crime stories or high-profile celebrity divorces, it goes without saying that a significant amount of popular content revolves around courtroom drama. The constant exposure to dramatized legal proceedings may lead to an inaccurate idea of how these processes actually work. This exposure can also contribute to the fear that everyday court cases, especially those in family law, might become publicly scrutinize. This fear, though not necessarily realized in family court cases, is valid. While family court proceedings are public, they are rarely accessed by the general public. That said, the highly emotional and contested nature of most cases does validate the fear of personal information and family matters becoming public and affecting their day-to-day lives.

In the context of family court, it is important to note that the details of a case are typically known only to the petitioner (the party filing the case), respondent, their attorneys, and a select few in their closest circle of family and friends. In certain situations, professionals such as therapists, court-appointed advocates, or parenting coordinators may also be involved in the process, but even then, the audience for an average family court proceeding is relatively limited compared to cases in other legal domains that garner widespread media attention. To obtain the documents filed with the court in a specific proceeding, an individual needs to have access to the electronic court record (which is typically only accessible by the parties, their attorney, or court employees). Without this access to the online filing system, a person looking for specific documents/details would have to travel to the court center and pay to print physical copies of the information they are looking for. This is not typically worth the time, energy, and fees it takes to receive whatever is contained within these filings if one is not actually a party to the case in question.

Unlike high-profile criminal cases or defamation lawsuits, family court matters rarely receive national media coverage or are broadcasted on platforms like CourtTV. Nonetheless, individuals involved in family court proceedings may have genuine concerns about the potential public accessibility of their personal information, especially when it comes to sensitive health-related details discussed during legal decision-making or parenting disputes [1]. Fortunately, the Arizona Rules of Family Law Procedure provide for additional measures to be taken where there are concerns about private information becoming public.

Rule 13, Public Access to Proceedings and Records

This family court-specific procedural rule affirms that proceedings are “presumptively open to the public,” meaning that if no additional stipulations are made, your proceeding will be publicly searchable by default. However, this rule also allows for the court to “exclude the public” for limited purposes, including:

-Promotion of amicable settlement (like keeping a high-value asset confidential in order to comply with the terms of a business-related non-disclosure agreement)

-Protection of a child’s best interests (including a health condition/diagnosis which should remain private)

-Protection of the involved parties’ physical and emotional well-being

The court may choose to do so on its own judgement,

The court may choose to designate something as confidential on its own motion, which is rare, but it may also consider the motion of a party requesting confidentiality/exclusion of the public in deciding to do so. Furthermore, both parties/sides involved in the proceeding may stipulate to confidentiality by designating their pleadings/involved documents as confidential [2].

Rule 17, Sealing, Redacting, and Unsealing Court Records

Parties may also request through motion that the court seal a record in a case or allow the records in question to be submitted in redacted form. This is a higher bar than the confidentiality request, as it applies to an entire case instead of a single document or its associated exhibits. If one party makes the request for a record to be sealed/redacted, the party in opposition to this motion must prove that overriding circumstances exist which should allow the record to remain open. The court may decide to order records sealed/redacted when they make factual findings/conclusions that:

-An overriding interest exists/overcomes the public interest in access records which supports sealing/redacting it

-A “substantial probability” of prejudice to the overriding interest/party seeking the seal exists if this request were not granted

-The proposed means of sealing the record is narrowly tailored/cannot be overcome by less restrictive means

If the Court finds that these conditions are met, then the record may be sealed or redacted through court procedure. However, if a less restrictive means of sealing the record/limiting access to court case information exists, these alternative measures will likely be used instead.
It’s understandable for parties involved in a family court case to worry about their personal lives becoming public when they file. However, the Arizona Courts have measures in place to ensure privacy and protect confidentiality during the process if it proves to be harmful.

[1] This may relate to either the parties/parents themselves, or the minor children.

[2] The stipulation that any litigation/hearings should take place in a closed courtroom does not automatically mean that this request will be granted.

Mallory Scott is a 3L at the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University, and law clerk at Woodnick Law PLLC. While working as a clerk during the summer, she has the opportunity to work on real-world litigation, but also research topics of interest relating to the future practice of law. The practice values exploration into collateral topics that relate to families, especially their relevance to popular culture and media.