Item

Date

From

Summary

1

11/08/00

Richard A. Berger

Associated Professional Services

Waterloo, NY

"All court records should be available to the public by all means possible at all times, with no exceptions."

1

2

11/10/00

Jennifer L. Hathaway

Foremost Search and Recovery Co.

Camden, DE

Opposes initiative to shut down or restrict elec./pacer files; they are public records; understand right to privacy, but court records are public.

1

3

11/11/00

Charles T. Pinck

President, Georgetown

Group

Public information (personal identifiers such as address, dob and ssn) is crucial to professional investigators and the legal profession; current legislation  (Privacy and Identity Protection Act; Identity Theft Protection Act) as well as new FTC regs. (treating such info. as financial and thus protectable) are threatening.

(Legal Times, 10/30/00)

3

4

11/13/00

Ariane Ciarlo

Claimsupport.com

Pompano Beach, FL 

Strongly protest efforts to close down federal court database access; lawyers and clients will have to pick up costs of this inefficiency; requests for comments like this are the first step to narrowing access.    

2

5

11/13/00

John Healy

Litigation Intelligence Service

Warner, NH

Courts have always been open and accessible; records are used daily by legal, investigative, law enforcement, and investigative communities; they have a right, and public needs to be able to observe this process.

1

6

11/13/00

Landers Service Co.

Private Investigations

Milton, MA

Lawyers and private investigators are licenced, responsible professionals; existing state laws vary widely, and can already severely inhibit legitimate background investigations; medical records are very difficult to obtain under present circumstances.  

1

7

11/13/00

John Frank, Esq.

Lewis and Roca

Phoenix, AZ

Electronic public access will make it easier to obtain financial info for fraudulent purposes; obtain trade secrets; and aid in identity theft, especially in bankruptcy cases.   

1

8

11/14/00

William Losefsky

Goffstown, NH

(private investigator)  

Uses PACER on a daily basis for judgement collections. Without access to this and other public record databases, these efforts are futile.

1

9

11/14/00

Guy Paradee

IARS

Rutland, VT

(private investigator)

Collection of public info is essential to conducting investigations.  Certain types of info. require restrictions.  It is clear that we lack the info necessary to understand investigative needs, and what the info sought is used for.  

1

10

11/14/00

Teresa Vila

Premier Invest. Svcs.

Fort Lauderdale, FL

Small business searches rely on internet databases.  Increased costs of in-person searches would be prohibitive.  We should go forward, not backward, with technological progress.     

1

11

11/14/00

Ted L. Moss

The Background Network, Inc.

There is a connection between private investigations and public safety; limiting public access will only increase costs and risks to public.  Security industry fills roles government cannot.  Dangers of release of personal information based upon fear of internet, the unknown.  Judicial process should be open to avoid government hiding its mistakes; to leave government in control of information could be. dangerous/oppressive.  Article attached entitled  "Freedom or Privacy"

5

12

11/14/00

Washington, DC

Level of privacy on-line should be the same as in court.  Case law should provide the answer.  Internet should provide greater and faster access to documents already public.  Standards of privacy do not change because of technology; technology must change to meet standards of privacy.  

1

13

11/14/00

Sanford Meltzer, Esq.

Keep current service.  We protect the rights of the people and the proposal would hamper our efforts in this age for instant  info.

1

14

11/14/00

Abilene, TX.

ECF would help limit travel and copying costs; would help in multiparty lawsuits if files could be downloaded and discovery, under appropriate protections, could be made accessible without duplication and mailing; care should be exercised to avoid publication of confidential information, which could be addressed in local rules and protective orders.

1

15

11/15/00

Joe Kolman, Reporter

Omaha World-Herald

Omaha, NE

What is public in paper files should also be public in electronic files; can understand fears re: personal data, but attorneys, members of court, and research entities should have unlimited access, excluding use for commercial purposes; believes such provisions exist in some federal info laws. 

1

16

11/15/00

Richard Wilstatter

White Plains, N.Y.

Criminal Defense Attorney

Objects to proposed restrictions to PACER for criminal cases.  Access is crucial for those with cases in remote districts.  Parties can move to seal records if that is necessary.  Defense needs access to balance power of state, and avoid the additional expense of hiring investigators.

1

17

11/15/00

Lexington, KY

Hard copy public documents should be treated the same as internet documents.  Sensitive materials in these documents should be sealed at party request while main document remains part of the public record.

1

18

11/15/00

Rebecca Lynn Woodward

Moyer and Bergman

Palo, IA

Legal Assistant

State court info. is  not readily available.  Federal court sites provide easy access.   Case info available to us makes our jobs easier, and services less expensive for clients.

1

19

11/15/00

Newtonville, MA

The original intent of our founders was a free and open government, particularly the courts; restrictions on access to court info is a form of obstruction and overt disregard for founders intent.  Courts should promote free and open access.

1

20

11/15/00

 Detroit, MI.

Federal Court Employee

Favors option 2 for criminal cases, keeping certain materials out of public eye.  In our court, very little of the named documents are in public files; judiciary should ban ssn use on civil documents.  

1

21

11/16/00

 Coeur d'Alene, IA

It is a basic right of people to access the courts; medical information should remain private. Any info. that is public in court should be public on the internet.  

1

22

11/16/00

Julie Titone

The Spokesman Review

Coeur d'Alene, IA

Staff Writer

Supports continuation of, and enhancement of public access to court records and full awareness of judicial actions.  Only minor, non-significant deletions to protect privacy- such as shortening of ssn or credit card numbers- should be considered.    

1

23

11/17/00

 Columbia, MO

Fully supports on-line access to records and dockets of the federal court system.  The current PACER system is antiquated and does not serve the needs of the general public.

1

24

11/17/00

 San Anselmo, CA

"Any sensitive personal information should be blocked out ("xxxxx"), all else in transcript should be made public on the internet."

1

25

11/17/00

Norman Meyer

Fairfax, Va.

Clerk of Court,

U.S. District Court

E.D.-VA

(Personal views; not those of court)

Public access should be restricted where privacy interest outweighs need for openness.  Sensitive personal info should be restricted to keep pre-defined data confidential. Renewed scrutiny necessary by litigants and judges to seal material on a case-by -case basis. Allow full access only to parties/litigants.  The same restrictions are necessary on access for paper and electronic records.  This will be difficult for records custodians to implement.    

1

26

11/19/00

 Milwaukee, WI.

If court cases are open to the public, they should also have access to those records.   Milwaukee allows open access to its court records (cites personal protection, business uses).  Leaving the public in the dark about  info. available in court records leaves them in avoidable danger.  

2

27

11/20/00

 Kent, WA.

Electronic records should only be reviewable at the courthouse, not across the internet.

1

28

11/20/00

Renton, WA.

Current records access constrained by court hours, viewing procedures, identity checks, provision of copies only, cost of service.  Unlimited internet access would eliminate these few privacy safeguards.  If we move to open access, need system for monitoring, charges for service, and read-only copies to deter fraud.  

1

29

11/20/00

Jim Sweeney

James M. Sweeney and Associates

(Pvt. Investigations) 

Legitimate searches are invaluable in protection of companies/individuals.  There are documents (tax, medical) that should remain private.  Courts are just in deciding access questions. He prefers  option that treats paper and electronic access equally, but restricts or presumptively seals sensitive information from public view.  Sufficient access is necessary to gain understanding of court case and decision- this requires ssn or dob provision by inquirer (software that can grant access sufficient for review, and positive or negative response from system).  In this way, courts do not have to release dob or ssn.

2

30

11/21/00

Norway, ME.

Proposals are fair, but in criminal cases, personal info. on defendants and their families must be shielded to avoid possible retaliation

1

31

11/21/00

San Francisco, CA. 

Data provides useful academic/edu. info on causes of bankruptcy available no where else.  Ssn and addresses could be blocked with no sacrifice of benefits to scholars or process.  

1

32

11/22/00

 Beaumont, TX.

Court files should be available on the same basis and cost either in the courthouse or on the internet and should be free in either place.  Provision of this service is a government, not a private function. 

1

33

11/22/00

 Cheyenne, WY.

Access to public records should not be limited to those with time, money and/or physical ability; documents containing sensitive info. should be sealed, with burden on filer to insure records are safe for public consumption.

1

34

11/22/00

 Gary, IN

Public info. should be listed on the internet.  We can do away with paper and cut staff.

1

35

11/22/00

 Seattle, WA.

If it is a public record, then I believe it should be as easily accessible via internet.

1

36

11/23/00

 Mineola, N.Y.

Please do not eliminate electronic access to criminal cases; doing so will represent an abridgement of the free access to public information.

1

37

11/23/00

Kent Morlan, Esq.

Tulsa, OK

Internet Publisher

Commentor collects and publishes info. on civil cases, judges, lawyers, etc.   Access to public records and internet should be free to all.  Most of public do not have access to federal court records due to fees.  Most lawyers are unaware or do not use PACER.  Judicial info. should be easier rather than harder to get and calendars and dockets should be free and available to all.       

1

38

11/24/00

Thomas Lincoln

San Juan, PR

Criminal Defense Attorney

Do not provide electronic public access to criminal case files because there is  less of a legitimate need regarding them.  Public need is outweighed by safety and security concerns (e.g., harassment of defendants/families; jeopardizing defendant cooperation; hampering law enforcement and prosecution efforts).  Reasons counsel might request for sealing of information may be obvious in some cases (e.g., pleas; sentencing issues; etc.), not in others.  The benefit of the doubt should be given to counsel.  On limited public access option, objections and concerns the same. 

2

39

11/24/00

 Chehalis, WA.

Internet access to court documents and cases is the best thing to happen to the American public; it is necessary for a person to be fully informed.

1

40

11/24/00

Andrew U. D. Straw, Esq.

Bloomington, IN.

Civil: support maximum public access, with increased penalties for misuse of data, and no charges;

Criminal: understands law enforcement reasons for wanting to keep certain documents public, but all documents that a judge does not have a compelling reason to seal should be open, including plea agreements, so that taxpayers can evaluate judge and prosecutor conduct.

Personal info. on bankruptcy and other civil (e.g., ssn; credit card numbers) should be excised or virtually sealed, but not whole documents.  Courts should not be cajoled into a mode of secrecy simply due to risk of privacy invasion. Persons whose rights are at risk need to take initiative to protect them. Courts should not backpedal on commitments to openness due to new technologies.    

2

41

11/24/00

 Katy,  TX.

Mechanisms, rules and law already exist to protect litigants, trade secrets, sensitive and other info. deemed private by motion to seal, etc. Default policy should always be resolved in favor of openness.  By its nature, litigation process exposes records to public view, which should not be limited only to those who can get to courthouse.  All court records, save only those recognized by law as appropriate for seal, should be available on-liNEThe AO should not be in a position to make new law and policy to seal records for the 99.9% of public who can't go to courthouse.  Full access benefits administration of justice and legal system as a whole.

2

42

11/25/00

In Toysmart case customer lists generated by this company were available for sale in bankruptcy proceedings.  This is a blatant invasion of privacy/possible identity theft.  Government is allowing anyone with money to access private info.  Customers of the bankrupt should not be punished.

1

43

11/26/00

Alexandria, VA.

Personal data (ssn; credit info.; address; photographs; etc.) should be blacked out from all paper or electronic record copies to protect privacy and avoid identity theft. 

1

44

11/26/00

 Seattle, WA.

Unsealed electronic court files should be treated the same as unsealed court files; all should be available for copying/downloading.  

1

45

11/27/00

Public access is necessary and required in an information based economy; internet access of court records is required to ensure public and corporate security.

1

46

11/27/00

Alan Schroeder

Costa Mesa, CA.

Law Librarian

Support full and open access to all court records, either print or electronic.  The  transient nature of info. technologies makes print version of court filings imperative until a reliable electronic standard is created and agreed upon.  Courts should be servants of the people, not research/ development entities for third party commercial on-line service providers without general system benefits obtained through licensing agreements; lawful use of these records has continued for decades under numerous laws on the books.  The AO needs to manage this new technology effectively.    

1

47

11/27/00

Privacy policy should be confined to courthouse access only.  Going to courthouse to obtain info. is not onerous and weeds out undedicated.

1

48

11/27/00

 Linden, IN.

All court records should be available over the internet- easier, and a lot less work; if the courthouse had more flexible hours, it might be different. 

1

49

11/27/00

Cordova, TN.

Would be very concerned if patient medical records became public via the internet (e.g., litigant who has been exposed to HIV).  This is very troubling legislation. 

1

50

11/27/00

Birmingham, AL.

Internet opens this type of data to unwarranted view; please keep access limited as at present.

1

51

11/28/00

 Rennsalaer, IN.

Computer filing is ok, but viewing of all public documents should be restricted to the courthouse only; courts should protect non-court personal info. due to current abuses.  The  potential for abuse is greater than any benefit.   

1

52

11/28/00

Electronic access is inevitable.   Privacy is important, but access should be equal whether you can make it to the courthouse or not.  

1

53

11/28/00

 Alpharetta, GA.

Immediacy of access should have no bearing on dissemination of materials that are public documents.  Some proposals treads on 1st Amendment.  You should encourage the widest dissemination possible.

1

54

11/28/00

 Clyde Hill, WA.

Civil cases: prefer a blend of options 1 and 2, with sensitive info. sealed on application of counsel.  Sealed info. could then be available on application for disclosure, stating reason or purpose (except commercial).  Violations should be subject to sanctions

Criminal cases: maintain status quo (no disclosure)

Bankruptcy cases: open and available (for electronic or paper files), using guidelines of Sec. 107.   

1

55

11/29/00

 Chicago, IL

Concerned about the erosion of privacy; court records should be protected from unrestricted and widespread public view; of the options presented:

Civil files:

option 1 does not adequately protect; unauthorized third parties would still be able to access;

option 2 allows protection, but at cost of more work of the courts, attorneys, and litigants; also a lack of clear standards could lead to litigation; better than nothing but not ideal;

option 3 is flawed to the extent that parties have no choice if not voluntary, and may be victims of dissemination of info from a weak or frivolous case;

option 4 privacy and security interests should be key part of court records management;

Criminal cases:

option 1 provides the greatest protection and best insures the efficacy of criminal justice process;

option 2 may not provide sufficient protection;

Bankruptcy cases:

option 1 provides needed reform to assure protection of sensitive info.;

option 2 may not provide debtors all the info. needed to assure the full and meaningful enforcement of debtors' rights;

option 3 should be adopted as a minimum, although greater protection is preferable;

option 4 may provide sufficient protection, but a better approach would be to assure protection unless legitimate need proven after application; but better approach would be to assure protection unless legitimate need proven after applying; balancing test of info. sought and reason for request compared to info. sought to be  protected, and reason to protect info.; similar to deliberative process surrounding privilege issues at the federal level;

Appellate cases:

option 1 should be adopt across the board rule for all federal courts;

option 2 does not promise uniformity; favor option 1. 

11

56

11/29/00

 Chesapeake, VA.

Fire walls and IP address controls achieve benefits and control risks of data access.  Electronic data access should require similar levels of cost and effort to paper.  A registration process and subscription fees are parts of a possible approach, allowing some traceability of accessors; some responsibility should lie with the person posting; rules and search engines should require open and free access to electronic and paper documents.    

2

57

11/29/00

 Lyman,  S.C.

Anonymity is the problem with unrestricted access- a cloak of invisibility; cost would prohibit the search for violators.  The same restrictions should govern internet access to personal info. as govern in person access; technology must exist to leave a "cookie" behind those searching data.   

1

58

11/29/00

 Prescott, AZ

If you can get info. directly by photocopy, you should be able to get the same info. via the internet.

1

59

11/29/00

Stanley D. Helsinki, Esq..

Boston, MA

A document is either public or private- no shades of gray.  The standard should be the same standard as is applied in allowing cameras into courtrooms.

1

60

11/29/00

 Los Angeles, CA

Keep court records of all types from electronic access.  The current system (paper access) addresses concerns by requiring interaction with gatekeepers in courthouse, limiting access to ssns, personal contact info., employment, and financial info.  Please respect the privacy of those who place their trust in the U.S. justice system.   

1

61

11/29/00

Peter Nikitas

State Bar of Wisconsin

One should analyze individual privacy data differently from corporate data.  Starting with individual data, one may see great harm in disclosure of medical records and ssns.  Statutes prohibit unauthorized ssn disclosure and disclosure of worker's medical information beyond strictly circumscribed exceptions, whether or not the worker is disabled. We should oppose broad disclosure of individual private data by federal courts, and any effort to condition suit on waiver of privacy rights, support efforts to provide openeyed, Mirandalike warnings to federal court litigants of the use of the data they file in court.

1

62

11/29/00

J C. Desmond

Savannah. Ga.

Career Law Clerk

An open government is a healthy government.  When private parties

use the judicial branch to resolve disputes they make "private" papers public documents.  Unlimited access to public court records also advances "citational accountability [of judges]."   Without unfettered access to court documents, "judicial legislation" and judicial politicking would be more difficult to detect.  Commentator favors the following proposals:

Civil case files no. 1 (place burden on litigants to partially or fully seal records, but promulgate a national rule hence, option 4 allowing partial (e.g., last fourdigit) tax  and credit card (etc.) numbers, but keep exception narrowly defined; options 2 and 3 NO!- don't nickel and dime people skip the 7 cents/page access charge;  provide open government, not another layer of wasteful bureaucracy; 

Criminal case files: option 2 makes sense and is well worded;

Bankruptcy case files: illumination of debtor data assists those who'd otherwise detect and illuminate fraud;

Appellate cases: support options 1 and 2 and finds them wellworded;

2

Criminal case files: option 2 makes sense and is well worded;

bankruptcy case files: bankruptcy has lost its stigma, and is abused by many; illumination of debtor data assists those detecting fraud;

Appellate Cases: supports options 1 and 2 and find them wellworded.

63

11/30/00

 Healdsurg, CA.

Civil case files: establish "levels of access" to certain electronic case file info.;

Criminal case files: provide limited electronic public access to criminal case files;

Bankruptcy case files: restrict use of ssn, credit card, and other account numbers to last four digits to protect privacy and security; segregate certain sensitive information on separate forms that will be protected from unlimited access and available only to the courts, Trustee, and to parties;

Appellate Cases: treat any document that is sealed or

subject to access restrictions at the trial court level with the same protections at the appellate level.

1

64

11/30/00

Anything normally protected under existing laws should be protected if found in a case file.  It is also essential to our court system to be able to research and examine rulings.  Thus, information relating directly to  charges, verdicts, legal and logical basis behind verdicts should be publicly available.  There is  no problem with using the internet to disseminate the public access portions of case files.

1

65

11/30/00

 Walnut Creek, CA.

All public court records should be available on liNEIf they are available without charge locally, they should be without charge electronically.  Consistent standards should govern protected info in paper and electronic records.  Perhaps info should not be on-line until conclusion of the case, as this would allow parties time to request the sealing of certain info. 

1

66

11/30/00

 Santa Rosa, CA.

Contents of civil should be completely available- necessary for a variety of research purposes.  Criminal records should be restricted for privacy reasons, and stripped of sensitive i.d. data before publication; better to err on side of privacy.  

1

67

11/30/00

 Vidalia, GA.

Records of trials are public and should be on-line; if court deems matters confidential, limited access for approved purposes only. 

1

68

12/1/00

 Binghamton, N.Y.

Government should not promote user-friendly access to this subset of the public record.  Age of electronic commerce promote misuse of data.  Make people go to the files.

1

69

12/1/00

 La Verne, CA.

No one should have access to personal or financial info. without a court order. 

1

70

12/1/00

Paper and electronic records should be treated the same. 

1

71

12/1/00

 Milwaukee, WI

Support full and open exposure of all case files, with penalties for misuse.

1

72

12/1/00

 San Francisco, CA.

Electronic records provide a technical ability for abuse of  masses of persons.  Limit the number of records a person or corporation has access to over time.  This is only a partial solution.

1

73

12/1/00

As court documents contain names, addresses, ssns., bank account numbers, they pose a grave identity theft risk- caution is therefore in order.  Until biological identifiers are possible, the internet poses risks from both here and abroad.  

1

74

12/1/00

 Palo Alto, CA.

Due to the private data contained in these files, they should be sealed. The only exceptions should be where pubic health and safety are at risk, like with criminal records.

1

75

12/1/00

 Boulder Creek, CA

Experience on jury duty, and laxity of care with regard to juror personal data, convinces me that judges should be subject to liability in tort for data security in their courts.

1

76

12/1/00

 Plano, TX.

Records need to be open, but downloads should be limited to prevent mass compilations and cross-referencing; also, IP addresses should be given to facilitate criminal abuse investigations. 

1

77

12/1/00

San Jose, CA.  

Electronic dissemination of court records should be limited to avoid large scale harm to large numbers of people.

1

78

12/1/00

 San Angelo, TX.

Allowing full access to all on the internet empowers those without  access; it should be embraced  wholeheartedly by the government.

1

79

12/1/00

Brian Lee Corber, Esq.

Panorama City, CA.

Court filings are public record in the absence of court order. They should be accessible via the internet in order to  save time and  money and to increases efficiency.  It will also  make people more comfortable with their system of justice.

1

80

12/1/00

 Lancaster, CA.    

Civil and criminal records should be available to the public, but personal information should be removed.  Business related files should be treated differently, and the info. removed from any file should be available upon court order.

1

81

12/1/00