Burkle

Burkle v. Burkle

Good Law
135 Cal. App. 4th 1045·37 Cal. Rptr. 3d 805
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 1, 2006B181878California10,969 words

Opinion

Opinion

Boland, J.

SUMMARY

Family Code section 2024.6 requires a court, upon the request of a party to a divorce proceeding, to seal any pleading that lists and provides the location or identifying information about the financial assets and liabilities of the parties. We conclude that section 2024.6 is unconstitutional on its face. The First Amendment provides a right of access to court records in divorce proceedings. While the privacy interests protected by section 2024.6 may override the First Amendment right of access in an appropriate case, the statute is not narrowly tailored to serve overriding privacy interests. Because less restrictive means exist to achieve the statutory objective, section 2024.6 operates as an undue burden on the-First Amendment right of public access to court records.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In June 2003, Janet E. Burkle filed a petition to dissolve her marriage to Ronald W. Burkle. Several months later, Mr. Burkle moved to seal or redact certain pleadings. The parties’ son and his parents were considered persons of “high public interest.” On April 13, 2004, the trial court ordered the redaction of various documents in order to protect the son from…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.