Epstein Secrets

orum in which to disclose these facts. *4 Although there is no case directly on this point, the present question comes fully within the holding of Barron, which thoroughly considered the com- petition between the people's interest in public courts and the personal interest in private facts. In effect

lic identification. However, Barron teaches that this is the wrong question because it overlooks the higher purpose of openness in the courts. In Barron, a case involving privacy concerns inher- ent in a divorce case, the court strongly reaffirmed the presumption that Florida civil courts are open.

ong presumption in favor of public ac- cess to such matters." Sentinel Communications Co. I. Watson, 615 So.2d 768, 770 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (citing Barron'. Florida Freedom Newspapers, Mc., 531 So.2d 113 (Fla.1988)). This presumption rests on the most fundamental values of American government. (ID 2

e majority resolved the issue by granting a narrow role to privacy based on considerations re- lating to the legitimate expectations of privacy. In the Florida Supreme Court's well-developed pri- vacy jurisprudence, the fundamental basis of the right of privacy is a legitimate expectation of pri- vacy. Not every fact in ev

orum in which to disclose these facts. •4 Although there is no case directly on this point, the present question comes fully within the holding of Barron, which thoroughly considered the com- petition between the people's interest in public courts and the personal interest in private facts. In effect

rong presumption in favor of public ac- cess to such matters." Sentinel Communications Co. I Watson, 615 So.2d 768, 770 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (citing Barron I Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 531 So.2d 113 (Fla.1988)). This presumption rests on the most fundamental values of American government. O200

lic identification. However, Barron teaches that this is the wrong question because it overlooks the higher purpose of openness in the courts. In Barron, a case involving privacy concerns inher- ent in a divorce case, the court strongly reaffirmed the presumption that Florida civil courts are open.

e majority resolved the issue by granting a narrow role to privacy based on considerations re- lating to the legitimate expectations of privacy. In the Florida Supreme Court's well-developed pri- vacy jurisprudence, the fundamental basis of the right of privacy is a legitimate expectation of pri- vacy. Not every fact in ev

r all court proceedings. A trial is a public event, and the filed records of court proceedings are public records available for public examination." Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 531 So.2d 113, 118 (Fla. 1988) (emphasis added). In light of this presumption of openness, "[t]he burden of pr

access to all records of the judicial branch of government, except as provided below." Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(a). This rule is a codification of the Florida Supreme Court's admonition that "a strong presumption of openness exists for all court proceedings. A trial is a public event, and the filed records of court proce

r all court proceedings. A trial is a public event, and the filed records of court proceedings are public records available for public examination." Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 531 So.2d 113, 118 (Fla. 1988) (emphasis added). In light of this presumption of openness, "[t]he burden of pr

access to all records of the judicial branch of government, except as provided below." Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(a). This rule is a codification of the Florida Supreme Court's admonition that "a strong presumption of openness exists for all court proceedings. A trial is a public event, and the filed records of court proce