GR 9 COVER SHEET

Suggested Amendment to

A.                                 Name of Proponent:           Judicial Information Systems Committee (JISC)

B.                                 Spokespersons:                   Justice Barbara A. Madsen, Chair

Judge John Hart, Vice-Chair

C.                                 Purpose:                     Clarify AOC Responsibility for Content of Court Documents

The JISC suggests changes to GR 31 that clarify the duty and responsibility of the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) regarding the content of documents within JIS.

GR 31 places responsibility on the filing parties to omit or redact personal identifiers from court documents. GR 31(e). The court and clerk are not responsible for reviewing documents for compliance with the rule before making them available electronically or in paper form.

The current rule does not address the role of the AOC when those court documents are made available through the JIS. The AOC has no control over the content of court documents and should not bear responsibility when they are displayed through JIS on behalf of the court or clerk.

JISC seeks to add language to GR 31(g) by adding a subsection labeled (4) stating “The Administrator for the Courts is not responsible for the content of any court documents published through the JIS.”

We also suggest changing section GR 31(e) subsection (2) to state: “The responsibility for redacting these personal identifiers rests solely with counsel and the parties. The Court, the Clerk, and the Administrative Office of the Courts will not review each pleading for compliance with this rule. If a pleading is filed without redaction, the opposing party or identified person may move the Court to order redaction. The court may award the prevailing party reasonable expenses, including attorney fees and court costs, incurred in making or opposing the motion.” This proposed change would strike the word “or” from this section and add “and the Administrative Office of Courts.” This change is being suggested in order to clarify that the AOC has no duty to review or redact court documents filed in systems connected to the JIS.

D.                                 Hearing: A hearing is not requested.

E.                                 Expedited Consideration: Due to the impending release of the appellate court web public portal application by the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), which will occur this Summer of 2022, we request expedited consideration to specify the roles and limitations of the AOC regarding the content of documents filed in the courts and made available through AOC applications. This service is one of the highest priorities of the Supreme Court Clerk and the Clerk/Administrators of the Court of Appeals.