- Part 3 -
Judge: “The only other thing on my agenda that I wanted to ask about is, I read, I believe, in dad's reply something to suggest that the -- that mom was alleged to have changed the grade school for the younger child despite the Court's orders in July, is that -- did I read that right?”
Anne: “I believe, your Honor, there were some issues about signing up for school. And that she did sign them both up for school in Beverly Hills. He had his concerns because he's got his concerns that she won't remain in the Beverly Hills school district, however, I know nothing more than what is in his reply. And I -- you know, I'm certainly aware that from respondent's standpoint, it's the closest school and she intends to stay in the area. His concern was for not staying in the area and I think that he would defer to whatever knowledge that minors' counsel has.”
Judge: “Okay. I thought I read a very clear statement that said notwithstanding the court's orders, mom changed school of the younger child but maybe I'm wrong. I thought I read that.”
Anne: “Well, the Court said that the minor child is to go to Third Street absent agreement of the parties. I think what he's saying is, I didn't expressly agree to her staying in Beverly Hills or going -- changing the Beverly Hills school because he had conditions upon it that were met in his opinion as it relates to her ability to remain within the district given that her apartment is up and he looked at her income and expense declaration and it made no sense based upon her state of expenses and income. So the Gruffudds remaining in Beverly Hills is of extreme concern to the Petitioner which is why it made sense to him that she would remain in the school she was in rather than perhaps having to move mid-year.”
The judge thanks Ms. Kiley for giving him context, and says that he has nothing else on his agenda, unless anyone has anything further.
Anne states that she and Bernal emailed back and forth that they were concerned about the media, and that there was a Daily Mail article that “essentially quoted from a lot of the custody issues.” She is concerned about that issue going forward, particularly with the custody evaluation. Anne asks the judge if the court would entertain an RFO for sealing the custody portion of the case, or if she needs to file an RFO to seal anything related to the custody case.
Judge: “My general philosophy, unless somebody is going to tell me that it's wrong, is that I don't like to make orders that aren't -- I call it on the "menu" in other words, fully noticed. But if everybody is bought in and fine with it, then I don't think we offend any kind of due process if people agree. And I'm happy to make orders that are consistent with stipulations. So that's my general philosophy, so I'm not hostile unless there's some sort of disagreement about that issue.”
Anne: “So, your Honor, not as Petitioner's counsel. Because petitioner does stipulate to and wishes to seal the proceedings, as it relates to custody -- the custody orders and the pleadings on custody. But as an officer of the court, I believe that the California Rules of Court are very clear that no aspect of any case can be sealed based upon stipulation of the parties.”
[EDITOR’S NOTE: All attorneys in California are considered ‘officers of the court’ and are held to high ethical standards.]
The judge states that he would have to make findings. Anne states that there would have to be a noticed motion to seal the custody aspect, so the press has an opportunity to come and oppose the motion, if they desire to do so. The judge agrees.
The judge asks Ms. Greenberg to file an ex parte motion to seal the custody proceedings. The court will set it on shortened time so there will be a properly noticed hearing, and then anyone that wants to come in and argue why those aspects of the case should be sealed can do so.
Anne states that she will work with the attorneys to make it a joint ex parte motion so that no one has to file extra pleadings and incur costs.
The judge asks if there is anything further. Nothing being heard, the judge adjourns the hearing at 9:51 a.m.
- End of Transcript Summary -