SPARC Forums

Hi Soc,

Judge sealed the evaluator's report during trial, which I presume means it's not part of the public record.

Attorney never gave me a copy, of course, so I only have what's in my head after twice reading it thoroughly.

I feel it could be beneficial for some folks to know particular aspects of it.  E.g., a therapist who biomom has taken our daughter to see.  The purpose of the discussion would be to better the therapist's understanding of the situation's dynamics (i.e., describing the psych test results of biomom) so that her on-going work with daughter would benefit.

My question is... can I "legally" discuss the contents of the report with third parties after the report is sealed?

Thanks,
DD

>My question is... can I "legally" discuss the contents of the
>report with third parties after the report is sealed?

Sealing the report is intended to protect all parties and children from unreasonable intrusion by the public into the parties' privacy. It's not intended to render the report "null and void" (i.e., as if it had never existed).

So, you can discuss it all you want. But under the best evidence rule, secondary evidence of the contents of an original document is objectionable on grounds that it is not the "best evidence" available, and either the original document must be produced or its absence satisfactorially explained.

In this case, if an issue based upon the contents of the eval were to come into play in court, and an objection was raised, you would have to ask the court to unseal the eval -- and this would probably be granted.

:)

.

>My question is... can I "legally" discuss the contents of the
>report with third parties after the report is sealed?

Sealing the report is intended to protect all parties and children from unreasonable intrusion by the public into the parties' privacy. It's not intended to render the report "null and void" (i.e., as if it had never existed).

So, you can discuss it all you want. But under the best evidence rule, secondary evidence of the contents of an original document is objectionable on grounds that it is not the "best evidence" available, and either the original document must be produced or its absence satisfactorially explained.

In this case, if an issue based upon the contents of the eval were to come into play in court, and an objection was raised, you would have to ask the court to unseal the eval -- and this would probably be granted.

:)

.