Loading…
Eighth Judicial Circuit Administrative Order 7.16 (Confidentiality of Baker Act Files): 37 operative paragraphs verbatim from the order as the circuit publishes it.
Eighth Judicial Circuit — Baker County. Administrative orders are amended and rescinded by later orders; the circuit's own index controls (the index lists it as a current instrument on 2026-09-14). Procedural information only; not legal advice.
• Such files will not be “sealed,” but the viewing of a file is restricted to those persons authorized by this order. • 2. Parties’ names and the court docket lines in Baker Act cases are not confidential and will be accessible to the public and to subscribers. • However, from the effective date of this order, any references to diagnosis, treatment or other information which reasonably appears to have come from a clinical record shall be omitted from all docket lines and replaced with an ellipsis (…) to indicate an omission. • References to the specific nature of treatment received or to be received, such as in an order authorizing consent to electroconvulsive treatment, shall be omitted pursuant to this order, and the docket line for such an order, for example, should read: “Order Authorizing Guardian Advocate to Consent to … Treatment”. • Nonspecific terms, such as “treatment”, “extraordinary treatment”, “involuntary placement”, “involuntary treatment”, “involuntary commitment”, “assessment”, “examination” and the like are permitted and shall not be omitted from docket lines. • 3. The following persons may view the documents, and electronic images of the documents, contained in a confidential Baker Act case file: a. The parties to the case; b. The parties’ attorneys; c. Any governmental agency or its representative authorized by law to view clinical records in such cases; d. Any other person or entity authorized by law; and e. A person or entity authorized to view a record by written court order. • 4. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Clerk of Court upon request may permit viewing and copying of documents in Baker Act cases where no petition for involuntary services or treatment was made or which pre-date any such petition if the documents do not contain any information from a clinical record. • 5. Documents treated as confidential under this order will continue to be imaged and the images will be made available to the court, court staff, and any person or entity entitled to view the documents in such cases. • 6. This administrative order is not intended to change any right of access to documents that are sealed by court order, nor to grant access to records that are confidential for other reasons. • 8. In the event a party to a Baker Act case, filed either before or after the effective date of this order, seeks confidentiality with respect to information accessible to the public in said party’s case file, nothing herein prevents said party from seeking relief pursuant to Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.420(e).
Such files will not be “sealed,” but the viewing of a file is restricted to those persons authorized by this order.
Reviewer note: Composed 2026-09-14 from BenchPath's custody copy (file 658ce9d6712e.pdf; 603,565 bytes, 4 page(s), native text layer): the index lists it as a current instrument on 2026-09-14 (https://circuit8.org/eighth-judicial-circuit-court/administrative-orders/); the operative paragraphs after the ORDERED marker are quoted whole, whitespace normalised only; signature block, page markers and stamps dropped. Effective date from the order's own date line where present, else the index date. [Rebuilt 2026-09-27: the published text had been cut at line and page breaks (37 fragments, many beginning or ending mid-sentence); it now publishes the 10 whole sentences those fragments belong to, verbatim from the rule's own source (custody (sha256-matched, 1 document)), with printed page markers and running headers removed.]
9 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-10.
6 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-13.