| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
Notice Of Motion And Motion To File Records Under Seal
Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Wednesday, February 18, 2026, Line 5.
Defendant City and County of San Francisco's Motion To File Records Under Seal is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Defendants did not comply with the requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 2.551 and the Local Rules. Defendant provided courtesy copies of their motion to seal, the memorandum, a declaration and a proposed order. All of these materials are quite general and, frankly, unpersuasive. The motion must be supported by specific facts (See H.B. Fuller Co. v. Doe (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 879, 895-896 [moving party must set forth specific facts in support of a motion to seal; statements that are too conclusory, abstract, or generic are not sufficient to satisfy the burden].)
Notably, the court does not routinely seal medical records or information, especially when the information that a party requests to seal amounts to adjudicative facts. The public has a strong interest in understanding the courts and their work and this requires transparency and access to information underlying judicial decisions and decision making.
In any event, Defendant did not provide a courtesy copy of the unredacted and redacted filings. Absent these materials, the court cannot conduct the necessary analysis. Even with these materials, Defendant will have to file a memorandum setting forth specific facts and demonstrating how they establish the parties' confidentiality and/or privacy interests outweigh the public's right of access to court records, an overriding interest supporting sealing, a substantial probability that the parties' confidentiality interests will be prejudiced if the exhibits are not sealed and that the proposed sealing is narrowly tailored and no less restrictive means (like omitting the material from the record altogether) exists to protect the information. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.550(d).)
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.
Counsel for the City is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/JMQ) | |