Judge: Mark H. Epstein, Case: 23SMCV02658, Date: 2023-09-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCV02658    Hearing Date: November 13, 2023    Dept: I

This is a breach of contract action by a landlord against a tenant and a cross-complaint by the tenant against the landlord.  This is NOT the unlawful detainer case that has been much in the news.  Today’s hearing is defendant’s unopposed motion to seal.

The motion is DENIED.  To seal court records, the moving party needs to show: (1) there is an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access; (2) the overriding interest supports a sealing order; (3) a substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced absent a sealing order; (4) the proposed order is narrowly tailored, and (5) no less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest.

Defendant has not made a single one of these showings.  The motion is hopelessly overbroad and the court cannot even understand what the purported overriding interest could be.  The court has reviewed the file and there does not appear to be any information in it that needs to be sealed.  The alleged privacy interest regarding medical condition does not come close.  The scant references are almost from the tenant to the landlord and none go into any kind of detail or contain medical records of the sort that HIPAA protects.

The denial is without prejudice to a narrowly tailored motion to redact or seal the minimum necessary under the law to protect a legitimate interest if the proper showing can be made.  Counsel should be sure to explain each and every element of the required showing and support each factual statement with evidence in the future.  Rhetoric is not sufficient.  For now, all documents filed in court remain in the public record.