Getting case files unsealed is costly, difficult — and worthwhile

Aggravation and expense have marked The Seattle Times' battle against secrecy in the King County Superior Court, but we're getting results and aren't giving up.

In March The Times published an extensive investigation into sealed court cases, called "Your Courts, Their Secrets." We reported that Superior Court judges and commissioners here had improperly sealed entire files in several hundred lawsuits since 1990, and we launched an effort to unseal those records. Five months and tens of thousands of dollars later, we're still at it. Our initial report brought the problem to light and prompted swift changes. Since March we know of no civil lawsuits in the court that have been sealed entirely. That's good, but the only way to know if the cases already under seal were newsworthy was to petition the court to open them.

So far, our lawyers have filed motions in 35 of the cases and 25 have been granted, with files unsealed in whole or part. Seven motions, one of which was filed just last week, are pending; two have been denied and one has been withdrawn. It turns out that almost all of the unsealed cases have significant public interest, and many will result in future stories.

"We were fighting to unseal the cases that had clear public interest," said James Neff, Times investigations editor. "Uppermost in our minds was the watchdog function of the news media. These are cases the public wants to know about and wishes they had known about before."

A clear example is today's special report by Ken Armstrong, Jonathan Martin and Justin Mayo about Lynn, a 13-year-old raped while in the state's care. The outrage at what happened to the girl is compounded by how her case was handled, culminating with sealing the entire court record, which avoided embarrassing the state agency and private contractor responsible for her well-being.

Sealing the entire file wasn't necessary to protect the girl's identity. "Almost everything related to this girl's identity was protected already as a matter of routine," Martin said.

Today's story is compelling reading, and there are additional elements behind the story that demonstrate the complexity of our continuing investigation. For example, in petitioning the court to open a sealed case, we must attempt to notify all parties to the original suit. That meant trying to locate a juvenile victim who wasn't identified in court documents that were then available.

Another example is the amount of reporting necessary to turn a legal file into a publishable story. "We viewed the court file as a starting point," Armstrong said.

In the case of YouthCare, the agency that operates the licensed group home where the girl was raped by a 29-year-old worker, we obtained and reviewed some 8,700 pages of government documents. But when we first started to pursue the documents, officials reacted as if the court seal extended to many of these documents, even though they were not filed as part of the sealed case.

"When I started doing the interviews, people were not even willing to talk because of the court seal," Martin said. Without access to those documents we wouldn't have known, for example, that the Attorney General's Office at the time had argued that the girl was partly at fault for being raped.

Today's story raises concerns about how the state system works. "The state was Lynn's parent at the time she was raped. They placed her in a home with a guy who was dangerous," Martin said.

Opening this case took four months from the filing of our motion. The amount of time and legal expense varies from case to case, depending on variables such as how the judge and parties to the lawsuit react.

"What's aggravating is that these files were sealed so casually," Armstrong said. "It typically took one page to seal them and, in some instances, nearly 200 pages of pleadings to unseal them. The back and forth goes on and on. Delay, delay, delay."

The two lawsuits where our motions were denied are particularly frustrating.

Appealing those rulings would divert money away from bringing legal action to unseal others records.

There have been bright spots.

From the start, the leadership in King County Superior Court has seen the problem and sought to remedy it. Some judges have been particularly helpful. We've gotten 10 other lawsuits opened in King and other Washington counties by filing informal requests pointing out that they shouldn't have been sealed originally.

The state Attorney General's Office under Rob McKenna has been very helpful in reviewing files and redacting information where necessary. "The AG's public-disclosure unit is fabulous," said Martin.

Perhaps the best outcome is more openness in the court, as shown by the absence of any new lawsuits sealed entirely. "It seems apparent that the secrecy going forward will be less of an issue," Armstrong said.

Meanwhile we'll work to unseal files and report the newsworthy stories we uncover.

Inside The Times appears in the Sunday Seattle Times. If you have a comment on news coverage, write to Michael R. Fancher, P.O. Box 70, Seattle, WA 98111, call 206-464-3310 or send e-mail to mfancher@seattletimes.com. More columns at www.seattletimes.com/columnists