The Third District recently provided, in BDO Seidman LLP v. Banco Espirito Santo International et al., a condensed explanation of the nearly impossible standard to seal a court file.
The issue arises infrequently, and rarely successfully, so a brief refresher may be warranted.
Briefly, the standard arises from a 1988 Supreme Court of Florida case, Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc., which holds:
1. Strong presumption of oppenness;
2. Burden is on party seeking closure;
3. Closure is only done when necessary for public policy reasons; trade secrets; government interests; “to obtain evidence to properly determine a legal issue”; to avoid substantial injury to third parties; or to avoid substantial injury to a party by disclosing information protected by privacy or common law rights.
4. Trial court must confirm there is no reasonable alternative.
5. Presumption of openness remains through appeals.