.., Ti 

The Honorable Joe Resweber 

County Attorney 

Harris County Courthouse 

Houston, Texas 77002 

Opinion No. H-826 

Re: Whether court records 

pertaining to certain types 

of cases affecting the 

parent-child relationship 

are confidential. 

Dear Mr. Restieber: 

You have requested our opinion regarding the confidentiality of court records pertaining to certain types of cases 

affecting the parent-child relationship. Specifically, you 

inquire about the district clerk's responsibility for maintaining the confidentiality of such records in paternity and 

voluntary legitimation proceedings and in suits in which 

termination of the parent-child relationship is sought. 

Section 11.17(b) of the Family Code, as amended in 1975 

by the 64th Legislature, requires the district clerk, upon 

entry of a decree of adoption, to forward the complete file 

to the Department of Public Welfare , which is then directed 

to "close the records concerning that child." Section 11.17 (a) 

declarea the confidentiality of 'the records concerning a 

child maintained by the district clerk after entry of a decree 

of adoption.". By contrast, the statute imposes no absolute 

requirement of confidentiality on the records maintained by 

a district clerk in termination proceedings. Section 11.17(f), 

however, provides: 

, 

The court, on the motion of'a party or 

on the court's own motion, may order 

the sealing of the file, the minutes of 

the court, or both, in a proceeding in 

which adoption or termination was 

p. 3487 
The Honorable Joe Resweber - page 2 (H-626) 

sought. This subsection does not relieve' 

the clerk from the duty to transmit files 

or petitions and decrees of adoption to 

the department as required by Subsection 

(b) of this section. 

Thus, aa to termination proceedings, the court = require 

the confidentiality of records in the possession of the clerk, 

including the minutes of the court on which the relevant 

decrees and orders are entered. Accordingly, it is our opinion 

that the records maintained by a district clerk pertaining to 

a suit seeking the termination of the parent-child relationship are not required to be maintained as confidential 

unless the court, on the motion of a party or on its own 

motion, orders the file in such case to be sealed. 

Suits for the determination of paternity and for voluntary 

legitimation (Sec. 13.01, et seq.1 are suits affecting the 

parent-child relationship. -Attorney General Opinion H-353 

(1974). The Fami~ly Code, however, does not require the district 

clerk to maintain the confidentiality of records in such proceedings. Although "all the records required to be maintained" 

-'~ by the Department of Public Welfare are declared to be confidential, including, presumably, records pertaining to paternity 

and voluntary legitimation actions, no such broad duty of 

maintaining confidentiality is imposed upon the district clerk. 

Sec. ii.17 (a). We therefore conclude that the court records 

maintained by a district clerk pertaining to paternity and 

voluntary legitimation proceedings are not required to be 

maintained as confidential by statute. 

We note that the Open Records Act by its express terms 

does not apply to the judiciary, and the provisions of that 

Act are not applicable to the records in question. V.T.C.S. 

art. 6252-lla, S 2(1)(G). In Open Records Decision No. 25 

(1974), we said: 

Since the Open Records Act by its 

express terms does not apply to the 

judiciary, that branch of government 

. is in the same position in regard to 

information held by it as it always has 

been. The Open Records Act neither 

authorizes information held by the 

judiciary to be withheld nor requires 

it to be disclosed. 

p. 3488 
The Honorable Joe Resweber - page 3 (H-826) 

In the absence of statute, inspection of judicial records 

is controlled bv the common law. The common law riaht of 

inspection of piblic records is not an absolute, b& ~a 

qualified right. Palacios v. Corbett, 172 S.W. 777, 781 

(Tex. Civ. APP. -- San AntGio 1915, writ ref'd). While 

records of judicial proceedings are generally open to public 

inspection, a court in its discretion may impound its files 

in a case and deny public inspection when justice so requires. 

76 C.J.S.. Records S 36, D. 140: Annot. 175 A.L.R. 1260 (19481. 

See C.v.C; 320 A2d 717,.753-24 iDe1. 1974); Sanford v. 

Et-Herald-Traveler 

20 Am.Jur.2& Courts Ss 

jurisdiction and control over their own records. Coleman 

Kz;s 151 S.W. 1040, 1041 (Tex. Sup. 1912); a 5 

, 12 S.W. 679, 681 (Tex. Sup. 1889); Iiannon v. Henson, 

7 S.W.2d 613, 619 (Tex. Civ. App. -- TexarkamEr aff'd 

15 S.W.2d 579 (Tex. Comm'n App. 1929, jdgmt adopted). 

Thus, while there is no statutory requirement that 

records in casea of paternity or legitimation be maintained 

as confidential, and while there is no express statutory 

authorization for a court to order such a record sealed or 

held:in.confidence either on its own motion or that of a 

party, we believe that the court has inherent power to 

control public access to its own records. The clerk of 

the district court should look to the court for guidance 

in the matter. 

SUMMARY 

The records maintained by a district clerk 

pertaining to a suit seeking the termination of the parent-child relationship are 

not confidential unless the court orders 

the file in such case to be sealed. Court 

records maintained by a district clerk 

regarding paternity and voluntary legiti- 

. 

p. 3489 
.~ The Honorable Joe Resweber - page 4 (H-826) 

mation proceedings are not required by 

etatute to be maintained as confidential, 

but the court has discretion to control 

public access to its retards when justice 

a0 requiree. 

ry truly yours, 

Attorney General of Texaa 

Opinion Committee 

jwb 

p. 3490