01D

D. Statutes and court rules

D. Statutes and court rules

Overview

Maryland

In Maryland, both access to court records and the ability to photograph, record, or televise portions of court proceedings are governed by the Rules of the state courts. See Maryland Rules 16-109 (concerning “photographing, recording, broadcasting or televising in courthouses”) & 16-1001-1011 (concerning public access to court records).

D. Statutes and court rules

Overview

Kansas

The U.S. Supreme Court has observed that, in many jurisdictions, the common law right of access to court records “has been recognized or expanded by statute.”  Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 n.7 (1978).  To the extent that the Kansas Legislature has codified common law access, it has done so principally through the Kansas Open Records Act (KORA). See Kan. Stat. Ann. (K.S.A.) 45-215 et seq. In KORA, the Legislature declared that openness of public agencies’ records is presumed.  See K.S.A. 45-216.  The presumption of openness controls unless a requested record falls within an exemption specified in KORA.  If a record is specifically exempt, public agencies “shall not be required to disclose” it.  K.S.A. 45-221(a).

D. Statutes and court rules

Overview

Georgia

In Georgia, the press and public’s constitutional right of access to judicial records and proceedings is codified in the U.S.C.R, which applies to the state and superior courts. U.S.C.R. 21 and 22 are also repeated in the uniform rules of Georgia’s other trial courts. See, e.g., Uniform Magistrate Court Rule 11; Uniform Probate Court Rule 18; Uniform Juvenile Court Rule 26. U.S.C.R.

D. Statutes and court rules

Overview

Tennessee

See, e.g., discussion of state statutory and constitutional provisions in In re NHC-Nashville Fire Litigation, infra.

..

D. Statutes and court rules

Overview

North Carolina

The public's right of access is set forth in N.C.G.S. 7A-109(a), "which specifically grants the public the right to inspect court records in civil and criminal proceedings." Virmani v. Presbyterian Health Servs. Corp., 350 N.C. 449, 463 (1999). See also N.C.G.S. 7A-190; 7A-191.