Sharon Stone Inadvertently Got Her Wish In Fee Dispute Lawsuit With Former Attorney.
In case you do not know it, sealing court records is not the norm and takes an exceptional showing for most civil cases. The standards are stringent and set forth in California Rules of Court, rules 2.550, 2.551, and 8.160. However, the next news item shows that entertainers frequently lobby for sealing of records, sometimes inadvertently getting their requests granted through mere processing errors.
Sharon Stone, the well-known actress gaining lasting fame from “Basic Instinct,” and two film companies were sued by attorney William Jacobson in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Mr. Jacobson sought to recover $107,000 in unpaid legal services, plus interest. The superior court judge expressed doubt that the case records should be sealed when the defense brought a request to do so. After all, court records are not sealed just because the parties want to keep the dispute private in nature. However, the court records inadvertently were sealed, but recently were released after the matter had settled earlier this year.
In an April 25, 2009 article, “Secret Sharon Stone Lawsuit Was Routine Fees Matter,” written by Anthony McCartney (and available for viewing on Starplus Entertainment News Blog), a free press advocate is quoted as saying there was little or no justification for the sealing in such a run-of-the-mill civil lawsuit.
BLOG OBSERVATION—Ms. Stone apparently nixed using a private judge to adjudicate the matter. We would think that contractual arbitration would have had a better shot at keeping matters private, because many providers (such as JAMS) have confidentiality rules and stringent destruction of documents policies. See, e.g., JAMS Comprehensive Arbitration Rule 26.