California Rule of Court 2.550: Standard, Filing, and Denial

To seal court records in California, you file a motion under California Rules of Court 2.550 and 2.551 and convince the judge that a specific legal interest overrides the public’s right to see the file. California treats every court record as presumptively open, so the burden sits entirely on the person asking to close it, and the standard is deliberately hard to meet.¹

One boundary before anything else. If your records are already confidential by statute, like juvenile case files, adoption proceedings, or certain family law matters, you probably don’t need a Rule 2.550 motion at all. Those are handled under their own rules.

The Five-Part Standard a Judge Must Apply

A California court can seal a record only if the moving party proves all five of these points. Miss one and the motion fails.¹

An overriding interest exists that overcomes the public’s right of access.
That interest specifically supports sealing this particular record.
There is a substantial probability the interest will be harmed if the record stays public.
The proposed sealing is narrowly tailored, covering only what is necessary.
No less restrictive alternative would protect the interest.

If the judge grants the motion, the written order has to make express findings on each of these five points. General worries about embarrassment or privacy won’t carry a motion. The harm has to be specific and demonstrable.

What Counts as an Overriding Interest

Rule 2.550 doesn’t list every acceptable interest, but the Advisory Committee Comment identifies categories courts have accepted: statutory privileges, trade secrets, and privacy interests when properly asserted and not waived.¹ In day-to-day practice, the interests that tend to succeed include:

Trade secrets and proprietary business information, such as financial data, customer lists, or formulas that would lose their competitive value if exposed.
Personal safety concerns, where disclosure could endanger a party, a witness, or a family member.
Medical and mental health records protected by privacy statutes.
Personal identifying information like Social Security numbers or financial account numbers.

What doesn’t qualify is just as important. Wanting to keep a settlement amount quiet, avoid bad press, or sidestep reputational harm is not an overriding interest. The interest has to be rooted in a recognized legal right or a concrete threat of harm.

The Paperwork You File

Rule 2.551 sets out the filing mechanics. The motion package has three pieces:

A motion or application asking the court to seal the identified records.
A memorandum of points and authorities walking through each of the five criteria as applied to the specific records.
A declaration under oath laying out the facts that justify sealing, including what the information is and the harm that would follow from disclosure.

The rule requires “a memorandum and a declaration containing facts sufficient to justify the sealing.”² The motion itself must pinpoint the exact documents, pages, or portions of pages at issue. Asking the court to seal an entire filing when only a few paragraphs are sensitive almost always ends in denial because it fails the narrow-tailoring test.

Redacted and Unredacted Versions

You prepare two versions of each document you want sealed. The redacted version, with only the confidential material removed, goes into the public file. The complete, unredacted version is “lodged” with the court rather than filed. Lodging means the clerk receives and holds the document but does not place it in the official case file unless the court later orders it sealed.²

While the motion is pending, the lodged unredacted records stay conditionally under seal. That protects the information during the review period so the motion isn’t rendered pointless before the judge rules.

How the Court Decides

One of the most important things to understand about California sealing practice: the court cannot seal records just because both sides want it sealed. A stipulation between the parties is not enough. The judge has to independently evaluate the request against the five-part standard, whether anyone objects or not.² This catches a lot of litigants off guard. A settlement agreement that promises confidentiality can bind the parties, but it cannot promise that the court file will be sealed.

The California Supreme Court’s decision in NBC Subsidiary (KNBC-TV), Inc. v. Superior Court established that a court must hold a hearing and make express findings before sealing substantive court records, and that the First Amendment right of access reaches ordinary civil proceedings.³ If the court grants the motion, the written order must state the specific facts supporting each of the five criteria and direct sealing of only the documents or portions that contain the sensitive material. Everything else stays public.¹

If the Motion Is Denied

Because the unredacted documents were lodged rather than formally filed, a denial does not automatically throw them into the public file. The clerk is holding them, and the moving party can typically retrieve the lodged documents. Lodging exists precisely so a failed sealing attempt doesn’t expose the very material you were trying to protect.

A denial can also be challenged on appeal or by writ. California Rule of Court 8.46 governs sealed records in the reviewing courts; the party lodges the subject record as conditionally under seal with the reviewing court, which maintains that protection during the appeal.⁴

Mistakes That Sink Sealing Motions

Most sealing motions fail for the same handful of reasons.

Asking to seal too much. Overbroad requests, like sealing an entire filing when only a few paragraphs or exhibits are sensitive, run straight into the narrow-tailoring requirement.
Vague declarations. Saying disclosure “could harm the business” without explaining how, what the information actually is, or what specific harm follows gives the court nothing to work with.
Relying on party agreement. Both sides wanting confidentiality does not satisfy the standard; the court decides independently.
Ignoring less restrictive alternatives. If redaction of specific details, a protective order limiting who can view the document, or restricted access would do the job, the court will choose that instead.
Citing only embarrassment or reputation. Negative publicity is not an overriding interest. The harm needs a legal basis, like exposed trade secrets or a safety risk.

Strong motions address each of the five criteria head-on with specific evidence, and show that the moving party considered less restrictive options and explained why they fall short.

Sealing Isn’t Necessarily Permanent

A sealed record can be reopened. Any party, or any member of the public, can file a motion to unseal, which the court evaluates under the same five-part standard. The question becomes whether the overriding interest that justified sealing still holds. Unsealing motions tend to succeed when circumstances have changed, the risk of harm has faded, or the public interest in access now outweighs the need for continued confidentiality. The court can also raise unsealing on its own, but it must first notify the parties and explain its reasoning.¹ Any unsealing order specifies whether the whole record or only part of it is coming open.

1
Judicial Branch of California. California Rules of Court – Rule 2.550 Sealed Records
2
Judicial Branch of California. California Rules of Court 2.551 – Procedures for Filing Records Under Seal
3
Justia Law. NBC Subsidiary (KNBC-TV), Inc. v. Superior Court (Locke) (1999)
4
Judicial Branch of California. California Rules of Court – Rule 8.46 Sealed Records