Proposed Rules Archives

• Proposed Changes to CrRLJ 8.10 - Closure of Proceedings and Sealing of Records (in Word Format)
• No comments were submitted.

Purpose:   The Supreme Court requested the District and Municipal Court Judges Association (DMCJA) review the apparent conflict between GR 31 and ARLJ 9 and provide a recommendation to resolve the conflict. The DMCJA has determined that because access to court records in courts of limited jurisdiction is governed by two court rules that are not entirely consistent with each other, GR 31 and ARLJ 9, it may create confusion for courts and the public. DMCJA therefore recommends the repeal of ARLJ 9 and related rules CrRLJ 8.10 and 8.11, with the simultaneous amendment to GR 31 by adding a new section (l).

CrRLJ 8.10 describes a procedure for closing proceedings and sealing records that is inconsistent with GR 15, which also addresses destruction, sealing and redaction of court records. Both rules specify procedures and provide standards regarding record sealing and redaction so it is difficult for courts of limited jurisdiction to have clarity regarding how to proceed. Further, CrRLJ 8.10 references ARLJ 9, which the DMCJA recommends be repealed. Therefore, DMCJA recommends that CrRLJ 8.10 be repealed.