Loading…
Parentage files sealed before July 1, 2010 stay sealed, but a judicial officer may review one and, on stated findings, redesignate it by ex parte order from sealed to confidential. In effect for 2026.
California > Fourth Appellate District > San Diego County > Superior Court of California, County of San Diego
[File stamp: FILED, Clerk of the Superior Court, DEC 31 2025, By: G. Arce-Barraza, Deputy] THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO IN RE THE LIMITED INSPECTION OF PARENTAGE FILES GENERAL ORDER OF THE PRESIDING DEPARTMENT ORDER NO. 010126-15 THIS COURT FINDS AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: All San Diego Superior Court (“court”) parentage actions designated as “sealed” prior to July 1, 2010, shall remain sealed and treated accordingly under the law. However, based on the needs of the court, the efficient administration of justice, and the authority vested in the Presiding Judge under California Rules of Court, rule 10.603, a parentage action sealed prior to July 1, 2010, may be reviewed by a judicial officer to consider redesignating the file as “confidential.” Upon appropriate stated findings, the court may issue an ex parte order redesignating the case from sealed to confidential and, thereafter, be treated accordingly under the law. This order shall become effective on January 1, 2026, and expire on December 31, 2026, unless otherwise ordered by this court. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: December 31, 2025 [signature] HONORABLE MAUREEN F. HALLAHAN PRESIDING JUDGE
[File stamp: FILED, Clerk of the Superior Court, DEC 31 2025, By: G. Arce-Barraza, Deputy] THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO IN RE THE LIMITED INSPECTION OF PARENTAGE FILES GENERAL ORDER OF THE PRESIDING DEPARTMENT ORDER NO. 010126-15 THIS COURT FINDS AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: All San Diego Superior Court (“court”) parentage actions designated as “sealed” prior to July
Reviewer note: Composed 2026-09-28 (California T3 San Diego build) from BenchPath custody ca/t3/ca-san-diego/go/general_order_010126-15.pdf (52116 bytes, sha256 1f626e79fe1202a6551118ae1b57f4af2a89d31987a5c3b1f689762878461ed8; 2 pages) - the court's own posted PDF, a scan with no usable text layer: transcribed from the rendered page images, every page read against the image; a machine reading (RapidOCR) was used only as a second reader for a word-level diff; every quotation mark, apostrophe, dash and section sign checked in full-resolution crops; pleading line numbers and “///” fill marks omitted; the file stamp and signature bracketed. Printed irregularities are kept as printed.
9 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-10.
6 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-13.