Before the Presiding Judges of the Administrative Judicial Regions

Directive Regarding Petitions for Access to Case Records

TO: Administrative Director, Office of Court Administration

DATE: October 24, 2003

SPECIAL COMMITTEE: Judge John Ovard, Judge Olen Underwood, Judge B. B. Schraub, Judge David Peeples, Judge Darrell Hester, Judge Stephen B. Ables, Judge Dean Rucker, Judge Jeff Walker, Judge Kelly G. Moore

Rule 12.9 of the Rules of Judicial Administration provides that a person who is denied access to a judicial record may appeal the denial by filing a petition for review with the administrative director of the Office of Court Administration (“OCA”). A special committee of presiding judges is selected to review the petition. Rule 12.2(d) defines a judicial record as one made or maintained by or for a court in its regular course of business but not pertaining to its adjudicative function. “A record of any nature created, produced, or filed in connection with any matter that is or has been before a court is not a judicial record.”

Since Rule 12 became effective, many of the petitions for review of denial of access to records have concerned records pertaining to a court’s adjudicative function. See, for example, Decisions 00-001, 00-003, 01-003, 02-002, 02-005, 03-003, and 03-004. Such records are not judicial records covered by Rule 12; they are case records. Access to case records is governed by laws other than the Public Information Act or Rule 12, and this committee has no authority to review disputes regarding access to case records.

We direct the administrative director of OCA to proceed as follows when that office receives a petition for access to records that appear to be case records. OCA shall send a copy of this directive to the petitioner and the respondent, with a cover letter explaining that the petition appears to be for access to case records, that such records are not covered by Rule 12, and that the committee of presiding judges will not review the dispute. OCA also shall send a copy of the petition to all nine presiding judges. If the petitioner disagrees with OCA’s determination that the petition is seeking access to case records rather than judicial records, the petitioner may send further correspondence explaining why the records are judicial records to the administrative director within fourteen days of OCA’s transmittal of this directive. If any presiding judge determines that the petition is for access to judicial records, then OCA and the committee will proceed in accordance with Rule 12.9(d)-(m).