Opinion
No. CV 10-01632-PHX-FJM
10-30-2012
Leanna Smith, Plaintiff, v. Barrow Neurological Institute, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
We have before us plaintiff's motion to file under seal her response to defendants' motion for sanctions (doc. 285). A party seeking to seal records must provide compelling reasons which outweigh the general history of access and public policies favoring disclosure. Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass'n, 605 F.3d 665, 679 (9th Cir. 2010).
Plaintiff requests the sealing of her response because the exhibits consist of juvenile court records, police reports, and deposition transcripts of Child Protective Services workers. Public policy favors the protection of minors' privacy. Indeed, juvenile court records and proceedings are generally confidential. See, e.g., A.R.S. §§ 8-208(F) ("Except as otherwise provided by law, the records of an adoption, severance or dependency proceeding shall not be open to public inspection."); 8-537(A) (excluding general public from termination adjudication hearing). Records relating to investigations conducted by Child Protective Services are confidential. A.R.S. § 41-1959(A). Therefore, compelling reasons exist for sealing plaintiff's response.
IT IS ORDERED GRANTING plaintiff's motion to file her response to defendants' motion for sanctions under seal (doc. 285).
__________________
Frederick J. Martone
United States District Judge