Oahu Publications, Inc. v. Takase

Summary

The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court addresses procedures for protecting confidential personal information that was improperly included in a publicly accessible court filing under Hawaiʻi Court Records Rule 9. The court considers mootness and the public-interest exception, the public right of access to judicial records, and the procedures for sealing or redacting improperly disclosed information. The proceeding arose from a petition for writs of prohibition and mandamus concerning a probable-cause application in a criminal case.

Holdings

1. The petition was reviewable under the public-interest and capable-of-repetition-yet-evading-review exception to mootness because improper disclosure of protected personal information was likely to recur, could evade review, and required an authoritative determination.
2. When personal information is improperly included in a publicly accessible court filing in violation of HCRR Rule 9, a party that learns of the violation must take immediate steps to seal the document or offending content and file a properly redacted version.
3. Upon receiving a motion to seal based on an improper disclosure of personal information, the court should promptly seal the document or offending content, narrowly tailor the sealing, issue a written order stating the reason for sealing, notify the public and parties of the right to object, and require an expeditious redacted filing if one has not been submitted.
4. When the court itself discovers protected personal information in a publicly accessible filing, it may, but is not affirmatively required to, take remedial action using procedures similar to those applicable when a party or nonparty discovers the improper filing.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the petition remained reviewable under the public-interest and capable-of-repetition-yet-evading-review exception to mootness after a redacted application was filed.
2. What procedures Hawaiʻi courts should follow when personal information protected by Hawaiʻi Court Records Rule 9 is improperly included in a publicly accessible filing.
3. Whether the writ of prohibition and writ of mandamus requested by Oahu Publications should issue under the circumstances.

Disposition

other