Janet E. BURKLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Ronald W. BURKLE, Defendant and Appellant.
Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Eight.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
January 20, 2006.
As Modified February 1, 2006.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro, Patricia L. Glaser and Nabil L. Abu-Assal, Los Angeles; Wasser, Cooperman & Carter, Dennis M. Wasser and Bruce E. Cooperman, Los Angeles; De Goff and Sherman and Richard Sherman, for Defendant and Appellant.
Philip Kaufler, Hugh John Gibson, Beverly Hills, and Hillel Chodos, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Karlene W. Goller, Los Angeles; Davis Wright Tremaine, Kelli L. Sager, Alonzo Wickers IV and Susan E. Seager, Los Angeles, for Intervenor Press Organizations Los Angeles Times Communications LLC, The Associated Press and California Newspaper Publishers Association.
Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Eight.
BOLAND, J.
SUMMARY
Family Code section 2024.61 requires a court, upon the request of a party to a divorce proceeding, to seal any pleading that lists and provides the location or identifying information about the financial assets and liabilities of the parties. We conclude that section 2024.6 is unconstitutional on its face. The First Amendment provides a right of access to court records in divorce proceedings. While the privacy...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
