Rule 11-20A. Sealing Files or Limiting Disclosure of Documents in Civil Cases

(a) Except as otherwise provided by law, there shall be a presumption that documents filed with the court shall be available to the public.

(b) Except as provided in this section and except as otherwise provided by law, including Section 13-5, the judicial authority shall not order that any files, affidavits, documents, or other materials on file with the court or filed in connection with a court proceeding be sealed or their disclosure limited.

(c) Upon written motion of any party, or upon its own motion, the judicial authority may order that files, affidavits, documents, or other materials on file or lodged with the court or in connection with a court proceeding be sealed or their disclosure limited only if the judicial authority concludes that such order is necessary to preserve an interest which is determined to override the public's interest in viewing such materials. The judicial authority shall first consider reasonable alternatives to any such order and any such order shall be no broader than necessary to protect such overriding interest. An agreement of the parties to seal or limit the disclosure of documents on file with the court or filed in connection with a court proceeding shall not constitute a sufficient basis for the issuance of such an order.

(d) In connection with any order issued pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, the judicial authority shall articulate the overriding interest being protected and shall specify its findings underlying such order and the duration of such order. If any findings would reveal information entitled to remain confidential, those findings may be set forth in a sealed portion of the record. The time, date, scope and duration of any such order shall be set forth in a writing signed by the judicial authority which upon issuance the court clerk shall immediately enter in the court file and publish by posting both on the Judicial Branch website and on a bulletin board adjacent to the clerk's office and accessible to the public. The judicial authority shall order that a transcript of its decision be included in the file or prepare a memorandum setting forth the reasons for its order.

(e) Except as otherwise ordered by the judicial authority, a motion to seal or limit the disclosure of affidavits, documents, or other materials on file or lodged with the court or in connection with a court proceeding shall be calendared so that notice to the public is given of the time and place of the hearing on the motion and to afford the public an opportunity to be heard on the motion under consideration. The procedures set forth in Sections 7-4B and 7-4C shall be followed in connection with a motion to file affidavits, documents or other materials under seal or to limit their disclosure.

(f) (1) A motion to seal the contents of an entire court file shall be placed on the short calendar to be held not less than fifteen days following the filing of the motion, unless the judicial authority otherwise directs, so that notice to the public is given of the time and place of the hearing on the motion and to afford the public an opportunity to be heard on the motion under consideration. The procedures set forth in Sections 7-4B and 7-4C shall be followed in connection with such motion.

(2) The judicial authority may issue an order sealing the contents of an entire court file only upon a finding that there is not available a more narrowly tailored method of protecting the overriding interest, such as redaction, sealing a portion of the file or authorizing the use of pseudonyms. The judicial authority shall state in its decision or order each of the more narrowly tailored methods that was considered and the reason each such method was unavailable or inadequate.

(g) With the exception of any provision of the General Statutes under which the court is authorized to seal or limit the disclosure of files, affidavits, documents, or other materials, whether at a pretrial or trial stage, any person affected by a court order that seals or limits the disclosure of any files, documents or other materials on file with the court or filed in connection with a court proceeding, shall have the right to the review of such order by the filing of a petition for review with the Appellate Court within seventy-two hours from the issuance of such order. Nothing under this subsection shall operate as a stay of such sealing order. Any party requesting the use of a pseudonym pursuant to this section shall lodge the original documents with the true identity of the party or parties with the clerk of the court in accordance with Sections 7-4B and 7-4C.

(h) (1) Pseudonyms may be used in place of the name of a party or parties only with the prior approval of the judicial authority and only if the judicial authority concludes that such order is necessary to preserve an interest which is determined to override the public's interest in knowing the name of the party or parties. The judicial authority shall first consider reasonable alternatives to any such order and any such order shall be no broader than necessary to protect such overriding interest. The judicial authority shall articulate the overriding interest being protected and shall specify its findings underlying such order and the duration of such order. If any findings would reveal information entitled to remain confidential, those findings may be set forth in a sealed portion of the record. The time, date, scope and duration of any such order shall forthwith be reduced to writing and be signed by the judicial authority and be entered by the court clerk in the court file. The judicial authority shall order that a transcript of its decision be included in the file or prepare a memorandum setting forth the reasons for its order. An agreement of the parties that pseudonyms be used shall not constitute a sufficient basis for the issuance of such an order. The authorization of pseudonyms pursuant to this section shall be in place of the names of the parties required by Section 7-4A.

(2) The judicial authority may grant prior to the commencement of the action a temporary ex parte application for permission to use pseudonyms pending a hearing on continuing the use of such pseudonyms to be held not less than fifteen days after the return date of the complaint.

(3) After commencement of the action, a motion for permission to use pseudonyms shall be placed on the short calendar to be held not less than fifteen days following the filing of the motion, unless the judicial authority otherwise directs, so that notice to the public is given of the time and place of the hearing on the motion and to afford the public an opportunity to be heard on the motion under consideration. Leave of the court may be sought to file the motion under seal pending a disposition of the motion by the judicial authority.

(4) Any order allowing the use of a pseudonym in place of the name of a party shall also require the parties to use such pseudonym in all documents filed with the court.

(i) The provisions of this section shall not apply to settlement conferences or negotiations or to documents submitted to the court in connection with such conferences or negotiations. The provisions of this section shall apply to settlement agreements which have been filed with the court or have been incorporated into a judgment of the court.

(j) When placed on a short calendar, motions filed under this rule shall be listed in a separate section titled "Motions to Seal or Close" and shall also be listed with the time, date and place of the hearing on the Judicial Branch website. A notice of such motion being placed on the short calendar shall, upon issuance of the short calendar, be posted on a bulletin board adjacent to the clerk's office and accessible to the public.

Committee Notes

amended June 21, 2004, to take effect Jan. 1, 2005; amended June 20, 2011, to take effect Jan. 1, 2012; amended June 23, 2017, to take effect Jan. 1, 2018.) COMMENTARY—2003: The public and press enjoy a right of access to attend trials in civil as well as criminal cases. See Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc. , 435 U.S. 589, 597–608, 98 S. Ct. 1306, 55 L. Ed. 2d 570 (1978). The guaran- tee of open public proceedings in civil trials applies as well to the sealing of court documents. See Publicker Industries, Inc. v. Cohen , 733 F.2d 1059, 1070–71 (3d Cir. 1984). See also the Commentary to Section 42-49A. Motions to seal or limit the disclosure of affidavits, docu- ments or other materials in cases on the complex litigation docket shall appear on the regular short calendar for the pur- pose of providing notice to the public. As regards the use of pseudonyms set out in subsection of the public's right of access to judicial proceedings. Does I Thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp. , 214 F.3d 1058, 1067 (9th Cir. 2000). ''Though not as critical as access to the pro- ceedings, knowing the litigants' identities nevertheless tends to sharpen public scrutiny of the judicial process, to increase confidence in the administration of the law, to enhance the therapeutic value of judicial proceedings, and to serve the structural function of the first amendment by enabling informed discussion of judicial operations.'' (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Doe v. Burkland , 808 A.2d 1090, 1097 (R.I. 2002). ''[M]any federal courts . . . have permitted parties to pro- ceed anonymously secrecy. . . . In [the Ninth] [C]ircuit, [parties are allowed] to use pseudonyms in the 'unusual case' when nondisclosure of the party's identity 'is necessary . . . to protect a person from harassment, injury, ridicule or personal embarrassment.' United States v. Doe , 655 F.2d 920, 922 n.1 (9th Cir. 1981) . . . .'' (Citations omitted.) Does I Thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp. , supra, 214 F.3d 1067–68. In Does I Thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp. , supra, 1062, the plaintiffs filed suit under pseudonyms against their employers alleging multiple violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The court concluded that in determining whether to allow the use of pseudonyms, the trial court must consider the severity of the plaintiffs' threat- ened injury, the reasonableness of their fears and their vulner- ability to retaliation. Id., 1068. In Doe v. Frank , 951 F.2d 320, 322 (11th Cir. 1992), the plaintiff, a government employee challenging government activity, was denied permission to proceed under a pseudonym which he sought due to his alco- holism. The court concluded that a plaintiff should be permitted to proceed anonymously only in ''exceptional cases involving matters of a highly sensitive and personal nature, real danger of physical harm, or where the injury litigated against would be incurred as a result of the disclosure of the plaintiff's identity. The risk that a plaintiff may suffer some embarrassment is not enough.'' Id., 324. The need for anonymity must outweigh the presumption of openness. ''The privilege of using fictitious names in actions should be granted only in the rare case where the nature of the issue litigated and the interest of the parties demand it and no harm can be done to the public interest.'' See Buxton v. Ullman , 147 Conn. 48, 60, 156 A.2d 508 (1959) (parties who were medical patients of named plaintiff were allowed to use pseud- onyms due to intimate and distressing details alleged in com- plaint regarding prevention of contraception), appeal dis- missed sub nom. Poe v. Ullman , 367 U.S. 497, 81 S. Ct. 1752, 6 L. Ed. 2d 989 (1961). Connecticut trial courts applying the Buxton holding have concluded that permission to proceed anonymously may be appropriate in situations involving social stigmatization, real danger of physical harm, or risk of an unfair trial. Doe v. Diocese Corp. , 43 Conn. Supp. 152, 158, 647 A.2d 1067 (1994) (plaintiff was allowed to proceed anonymously in added to subsection (g). COMMENTARY—2018: The change to this section clari- fies that a party requesting the approval of the judicial authority to use a pseudonym must lodge the original documents identi- fying the party or parties by name with the clerk of the court.