Arizona Supreme Court rejects petition to seal civil case details amid privacy debate
A four-justice panel of the Arizona Supreme Court declined to order sealing of records in Metke v. Oxford Bank, finding no statutory basis to override the state's open-records presumption.
In Metke v. Oxford Bank, a petitioner sought to seal court records alleging that background checks revealing pending civil litigation led to withdrawn job offers. He claimed the appellate court erred by refusing to balance his privacy interests with the public’s right to access, citing Rule 123 and Rule 5.4(c)(2). The Arizona Supreme Court panel, comprising Justices Clint Bolick, William Montgomery, Kathryn King, and Maria Elena Cruz, held that the open-records policy is a strong presumption and that sealing is limited to specific categories such as juvenile or mental-health records, none of which applied.
The court emphasized that a denial of a sealing request does not obligate the court to make detailed findings. Moreover, the petitioner’s reliance on A.R.S. § 23-364(G) was deemed inapplicable to civil actions. The justices concluded that the petitioner had not demonstrated an overriding interest that outweighs public access, and the motion was rightly denied.
Why it matters
The ruling clarifies that Arizona court records remain public unless they fall within narrowly defined confidential categories, affecting privacy and employment background checks.
In this story
