California Rule of Court 2.550: Five-Part Test and Filing Procedure

California Rule of Court 2.550 sets the standard a trial court must apply before it will seal any court record, and the standard is intentionally strict. Court records in California are presumptively open, so a party asking to seal a document has to prove that a specific, serious interest outweighs the public’s right of access. The rule works with Rule 2.551, which supplies the filing procedure, and both apply in civil and criminal cases in the trial courts.¹

Before spending time on a motion, check whether the record is already confidential by statute. Juvenile case files, adoption proceedings, and some family law matters are sealed or restricted by separate law. If your document falls into one of those categories, you likely do not need a Rule 2.550 motion at all.

The Five-Part Test

A court can seal a record only if the party requesting the seal proves every one of these:

An overriding interest exists that overcomes the right of public access.
That interest supports sealing this specific record.
A substantial probability exists that the interest will be harmed if the record stays public.
The proposed sealing is narrowly tailored.
No less restrictive means will protect the interest.

Miss one and the motion fails. If the court grants sealing, its order must make express findings on each of the five criteria and must direct sealing only of the documents or portions that actually contain the sensitive material. Everything else stays public.¹

The presumption of openness behind this test comes from NBC Subsidiary (KNBC-TV), Inc. v. Superior Court, in which the California Supreme Court held that the First Amendment right of access extends to ordinary civil proceedings and that court records are “presumptively open.”²

What Counts as an Overriding Interest

The rule does not list every qualifying interest, but the Advisory Committee Comment to Rule 2.550 recognizes statutory privileges, trade secrets, and privacy interests that have been properly asserted and not waived.¹ In everyday practice, the interests courts most often accept include:

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

What does not qualify: wanting to keep a settlement amount quiet, avoid bad press, or spare a party embarrassment. The interest has to rest on a recognized legal right or a concrete threat of harm.

How to File Under Rule 2.551

Rule 2.551 sets the paperwork. The requesting party must file three documents together:

A motion or application asking the court to seal identified records.
A memorandum of points and authorities showing how each of the five criteria is met for the specific records at issue.
A declaration stating the facts that justify sealing, including the nature of the information and the specific harm public disclosure would cause.

The rule requires “a memorandum and a declaration containing facts sufficient to justify the sealing.”³ Vague statements that disclosure “could cause harm” will not carry the declaration. Specifics do.

Two Versions of Every Document

The requesting party prepares two versions of anything it wants sealed. A public, redacted version goes into the court file with the confidential material removed. The complete, unredacted version is “lodged” with the court, meaning the clerk receives and holds it but does not make it part of the official file unless the court later orders it sealed. The lodged records stay conditionally under seal while the court considers the request, so the motion is not defeated by the filing itself.³

The motion has to identify the exact documents, pages, or portions of pages proposed for sealing. This ties directly to the narrow-tailoring requirement. Asking to seal an entire filing when only a few paragraphs are sensitive will almost certainly be denied.

Why Party Agreement Isn’t Enough

One point catches litigants off guard: a stipulation between the parties does not authorize sealing. The court must independently evaluate the request against the five-part standard whether or not the opposing side objects.³ A settlement agreement that promises confidentiality cannot guarantee that court records will be sealed. Only the court’s own findings can do that.

NBC Subsidiary also established that a court must hold a hearing and make express findings before sealing substantive court records.²

If the Motion Is Denied

Because the confidential material was lodged rather than formally filed, a denial does not automatically expose it. The clerk holds the lodged documents rather than placing them in the case file, and the requesting party can typically retrieve them. That is the point of the lodging procedure: a failed sealing attempt should not itself defeat the confidentiality the party was trying to protect.

A denial can also be reviewed on appeal or by writ. Rule 8.46 governs sealed records in the reviewing courts. The party lodges the record as conditionally under seal with the reviewing court, which maintains that protection during review. If the reviewing court upholds the denial, it returns paper records to the lodging party or permanently deletes electronic records.⁴

Unsealing a Record

A sealed record does not stay sealed by default. Any party, or any member of the public, can move to unseal it. The court applies the same five-part test in reverse, asking whether the overriding interest that justified sealing still holds. Unsealing motions generally succeed by showing changed circumstances: the interest no longer exists, the risk of harm has diminished, or the public interest in access now outweighs the need for continued confidentiality. The court can also propose unsealing on its own, but it must notify the parties and give reasons first. Any unsealing order has to specify whether the whole record or only a portion is being opened.¹

Press and Public Standing

Members of the press and public can challenge a sealing order even without being parties to the underlying case. Under NBC Subsidiary, the public is entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard before records are sealed.² A journalist or advocacy organization can intervene specifically to oppose sealing or to seek unsealing of records already under seal, and no deadline requires the challenge to come before the underlying case ends.

Common Reasons Sealing Motions Fail

Most denials trace back to the same handful of problems:

Asking to seal too much. Whole filings sail past the narrow-tailoring requirement when only paragraphs or exhibits are actually sensitive.
Vague declarations. “Disclosure could harm the business” is a conclusion, not a fact. The declaration needs to describe what the information is and what specific harm follows from disclosure.
Relying on the parties’ agreement. The court will not rubber-stamp a stipulated seal.
Ignoring less restrictive alternatives. If redaction of specific details, a protective order, or restricted access could protect the interest, sealing fails. The motion should explain why those options fall short.
Citing embarrassment or reputation. Public scrutiny is not an overriding interest. The harm has to be legal in character, such as loss of a trade secret or a safety risk.

Strong motions take each of the five criteria in turn, back them with specific evidence in the declaration, and show that the requesting party actually considered and rejected less restrictive alternatives before asking for a seal.

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