Quantcast
MobileRJ | RSS TwitterTwitter FacebookFacebook E-mail Alerts
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

Opinion
Jul. 01, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

EDITORIAL: Opening sealed lawsuits
More Info

Although the power of the judiciary provides courts with opportunities for extraordinary mistakes, that same power delivers the means to remedy errors with relative dispatch. Witness the opening of previously sealed civil lawsuits in Clark County District Court.

Last year, an award-winning Review-Journal investigative series found judges had hidden from the public more than 100 cases since 2000. In addition to the allegations of each dispute, judges sealed their own identities and whatever justification might have existed for sheltering parties from the scrutiny of the taxpayers who fund the courts. The newspaper's investigation determined most cases were sealed solely to spare the wealthy and well-known -- many of them lawyers -- from perceived embarrassment.

Most Popular Stories
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: What stops mass murderers? A gun
  • SHERMAN FREDERICK: Call evil by its rightful name
  • EDITORIAL: Terrorism on trial
  • EDITORIAL: A pre-9/11 approach to terror
  • LETTERS: Public-sector workers are still doing well
  • LETTERS: Harry Reid: Working hard for all Americans
  • EDITORIAL: They took our jobs!
  • EDITORIAL: 'That's the ticket!'
  • Our politicians are the greatest, all right
  • EDITORIAL: I believe in free speech, but ...




    • In response to the articles, the Nevada Supreme Court took less than a year to enact new rules limiting the sealing of civil cases. Where District Court judges previously exercised unlimited discretion in sealing lawsuits, the new standards require jurists to hear a compelling public argument for privacy and enter a record of the justification for sealing a case, including all parties involved.

    The new rules also allowed the Review-Journal to review case files that previously were kept secret. Clark County court clerks recently opened or partially opened several lawsuits of interest to the public:

    -- The State Bar of Nevada was named as a co-defendant in a lawsuit filed by a man serving a life sentence in prison. The bar had requested that the case be sealed.

    -- KLAS-TV, Channel 8, was named a co-defendant in a lawsuit filed against the Clark County School District and a former teacher serving a prison sentence for sex crimes against students.

    -- A case against a manufacturer of artificial hearts alleged the re-use of parts.

    -- A lawsuit that accused a Catholic priest of bilking more than $200,000 from an elderly parishioner alleged that a second priest coached the victim before her testimony was taken in a deposition, and that the accused priest was allowed to be present during her deposition. The Diocese of Las Vegas requested that the lawsuit be sealed.

    "A trusted priest who admits taking money from his 88-year-old parishioner," stated the plaintiff's argument for keeping the case unsealed, "is the very type of offense the community should know about."

    Exactly. Sealed lawsuits undermine public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary. Taxpayers rightly expect that judges will dispense justice fairly, not in secret, and not with special favors to friends and campaign contributors.

    We applaud the steps taken by Clark County District Court to return the public's business to public scrutiny and adhere to the rule of law.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 11 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Elaine Renoire wrote on July 03, 2008 11:07 PM: Sealed records are prevelent in unlawful and/or abusive guardianship/conservatorship cases - sealing the dastardly deeds so to speak.

    The Seattle Times did a great expose about this very issue last year.

    Open courts and records benefit everybody but the crooks.

    Visit www.StopGuardianAbuse.org, the National Association to STOP Guardian Abuse and read victim profiles.

    Yours,
    Elaine Renoire
    NASGA


    Albino Luciani wrote on July 01, 2008 03:22 PM: www.bishop-accountability.org
    /abusetracker for daily verified coverage on why no laity should be donating any monies to the overtly criminal cover up & pedophile enabling curia.

    www.amazon.com for over 90+ recently published books on the subject, by RC Bishops Jeffery Robinson & Thomas Gumbleton, Dr. Leon Podles, Richard Sipe, David Yallop, Jason Berry, Marci Hamiliton, Dr. Robert Grant, Fr. Thomas Reese, SJ, & Fr. Thomas Doyle, OP, to name but a few.

    Pedophiles and their aid, abetting and enabling miters, and red hats, are NOT curable, they (in the many hundreds globally) are maligent cancers in the church and must be removed.

    Among the GUILTY are: Mahony, Hughes, Egan, Law, MacCormack, McCarrick, O'Malley, Hubbard, Barnes, Brom, Brown, Walsh, George, Maida, Rigali, Burke, Curry, Ryan, McGrath, Chaput, Pell, DiNardo, Rivera, Hummes, Keeler, Sodano, Bertone, Scola, Leveda, of many hundreds.

    No Curia Accountability? No Laity monies (100% of Church revenue is derived from the laith in the BILLIONS OF TAX FREE DOLLARS PER YEAR)!

    It's THAT Simple! Laity YOU hold the power!

    Albino Luciani
    Reporting From Heaven Where My Immediate successot John Paul II (NO SAINT) Is No Where To Be Found, Who Appointed 99% Of These Cardinal & Bishop CROOKS


    To Jubal wrote on July 01, 2008 02:43 PM: A truer statement has never been spoken.


    Jubal Harshaw wrote on July 01, 2008 11:37 AM: Question: what's a hundred dead laywers on the bottom of the sea?

    Answer: a good start.


    John F wrote on July 01, 2008 08:23 AM: Let's examine the so-called logic of this editorial for a bit, shall we?

    The RJ editors are fond of criticizing what they call judicial activism. They claim to believe that judges should be in the business of interpreting the law, not creating it.

    Fine.

    "Last year, an award-winning Review-Journal investigative series found judges had hidden from the public more than 100 cases since 2000."

    "In response to the articles, the Nevada Supreme Court took less than a year to enact new rules limiting the sealing of civil cases."

    The editors believe this is a good thing.

    Fine, too.

    But one has to ask, what does the law say on this? Does the law give judges the unlimited authority to seal civil cases? If so, these new rules certainly
    constitute the Supreme Court creating new laws where no statutes exist to justify them. If the law does not give judges unlimited authority to seal civil cases why are new rules necessary? (Any attorneys out there wish to clarify for us?)

    Since when is it within the purview of the Court to enact new rules? I thought that was a function of the legislature. At least that's what the editors have been telling us for lo these many years.

    Everyone likes judicial activism when the courts are being active in ways they like. Certainly everyone should be happy with these new rules. The editors are correct when the say that, "Sealed lawsuits undermine public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary." I look forward to their next editorial praising the activism of the Supreme Court.


    delray wrote on July 01, 2008 07:32 AM: what awards did the rj win for uncovering the obvious. The RJ is still feeling the sting of LA times articles....


    Just Watchin wrote on July 01, 2008 07:12 AM: Amen


    Mama Bear wrote on July 01, 2008 05:56 AM: Corruption knows no boundaries, and quality journalism is the only solution to shed light on the dirty little secrets that the rich and powerful would hope to hide.


    Travis wrote on July 01, 2008 05:31 AM: "In that way the judges can't rule on cases by which lawyer on which side donated the most to his or her campaign"

    Great point. I would go a step further. Forbid lawyers from making campaign donations to judges. They can donate to any politician they want, but never a judge. Maybe all campaigns for judges should be publicly financed, completely eliminating their need to raise money for a political campaign. Then they can focus on one job, interpreting law.


    Travis wrote on July 01, 2008 05:27 AM: Great work RJ. I would suggest you stay on your toes on this one. I seriously doubt the wealthy and "privileged" will give up trying to find a way to have their individual cases sealed.


    Read All Comments