What Are Protective Orders Regarding the Discovery of Information in Arizona Family Law Cases?
As in most civil cases, Arizona family court cases typically allow each party an opportunity to investigate the claims and defenses of the other parties. See Ariz. R. Fam. L. Pro. 51 This process is referred to as “discovery.” See id. Discovery can be accomplished through a variety of different methods, such as submitting written questions to be answered by another party, taking a deposition and asking another party questions orally, requesting records from another party, requesting that another party admit or deny certain facts, requesting a physical or mental evaluation, etc…. See Ariz. R. Fam. L. Pro. 51(a) Some methods also include seeking information from non-parties, such as sending subpoenas for information and taking depositions of non-parties to ask questions orally. See id. In short, there are a lot of ways in which confidential or sensitive information may be obtained by others and used in the court case, as well as a lot of ways in which these discovery tools might be abused. See id. Fortunately, the Arizona Rules of Family Law Procedure contains a rule that authorizes Arizona courts to make orders designed to address these types of issues. See Ariz. R. Fam. L. Pro. 53.
In Arizona family court, the purpose of a protective order concerning discovery is to protect “a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense . . . .” Ariz. R. Fam. L. Pro. 53(a). The rule places a burden of proof on the party that is seeking the protective order; “[t]he burden of showing good cause for an order remains with the party seeking confidentiality.” Ariz. R. Fam. L. Pro. 53(d)(1)(B).
Up front, it should be noted that requests for such protective orders are not limited to the parties to the case and not necessarily limited to being made in the court where the family law case is pending. The rule states that “[a] party or any person from whom discovery is sought may move for a protective order in the court where the action is pending . . . .” Ariz. R. Fam. L. Pro. 53(a). The rule goes on to mention that, “alternatively, on matters relating to a deposition, the court in the county where the deposition will be taken.” Id. In other words, a non-party deponent may file a motion for a protective order locally, where the deposition is scheduled to take place, and thereby minimize the burden on that individual of having to seek a protective order in a different county. See id.
If the court finds it appropriate to issue a protective order concerning discovery, the rule authorizes the court to enter an order for any of the following:
- forbidding the discovery,
- specifying terms and conditions, including time and place, for the discovery,
- prescribing a discovery method other than the one selected by the party seeking discovery,
- forbidding inquiry into certain matters, or limiting the scope of discovery to certain matters,
- designating the persons who may be present while the discovery is conducted,
- requiring that a deposition be sealed and opened only on court order,
- requiring that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information not be revealed or be revealed only in a specified way, and/or
See id. When the court issues a protective order restricting the release of information or materials to nonparties or intervenors, the court “must use the least restrictive means to maintain any needed confidentiality.” Ariz. R. Fam. L. Pro. 53(d)(3).
Additionally, “[w]hen ruling on a motion for a confidentiality order, the court must make findings of fact concerning any relevant factors . . . .” Those factors include but are not limited to:
- any party’s or person’s need to maintain the confidentiality of such information or materials,
- any nonparty’s or intervenor’s need to obtain access to such information or materials, and
- any possible risk to the public health, safety, or financial welfare that such information or materials may relate to or reveal.
See Ariz. R. Fam. L. Pro. 53(d)(2). It is important to note here that “[a] party moving for entry of a confidentiality order must submit with its motion a proposed order containing proposed findings of fact.” See id.
Huffman-Shayeb Law, PLLC has experience in both requesting and responding to requests for protective orders concerning discovery in Arizona family law cases. If you find yourself in need of legal advice or representation in an Arizona family court case, contact Huffman-Shayeb Law, PLLC today to schedule a consultation.
