Removes the 5 year waiting period to seal court records where a civil action was dismissed, or there was a lack of prosecution, or the matter resolved and the terms of the resolution satisfied, removes the limit of 1 request to seal records every 5 years.
Summary
H6110 amends Rhode Island’s Residential Landlord and Tenant Act to expand access to sealing court records in certain landlord-tenant civil actions. The bill applies to actions under §§ 34-18-35, 34-18-36, and 34-18-38 and allows a party to move to seal the record after the appeal period ends, so long as the underlying case was dismissed on a motion to dismiss, resolved by stipulation and the stipulation has been satisfied, resulted in a fully satisfied monetary judgment, or was dismissed for lack of prosecution after five years.
The bill also removes two existing limits in current law: the five-year waiting period before a sealing motion may be filed and the restriction that a party may request sealing only once every five years. Under the proposal, a court must still find that notice was given to all parties and that the motion is the only sealing request made by that moving party within the previous five years, but the overall effect is to make sealing more available and potentially faster for qualifying cases. The act would take effect upon passage.
Impact
This bill would amend § 34-18-60 of the Rhode Island General Laws, changing the rules governing sealing and unsealing of court files in residential landlord-tenant cases. It would reduce procedural barriers for parties seeking to seal records in qualifying civil actions, which could affect tenants and landlords involved in eviction-related or other residential tenancy disputes, as well as court administration and public access to records.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the available context suggests a neutral-to-supportive policy approach focused on record sealing and relief for parties in resolved or dismissed landlord-tenant cases. The bill’s stated purpose is administrative and privacy-oriented rather than punitive or regulatory, and there is no documented opposition in the provided materials.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be the balance between privacy and public access to court records. Supporters would likely favor easier sealing for people whose cases were dismissed, resolved, or abandoned, arguing it helps reduce long-term harm from housing-related court records. Potential critics may worry that removing the five-year waiting period and the once-every-five-years limit could make records less transparent and reduce the public’s ability to track landlord-tenant litigation patterns.