Ariz. R. Fam. Law. proc. 5
COMMENT TO 2019 AMENDMENT
States-like Arizona-that accept federal grant funds under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) cannot publish anything on the Internet that would reveal the name or location of a plaintiff in a protective order proceeding. To ensure that Arizona courts comply, effective January 1, 2017, Rule 123(g)(1)(E)(ii)-(iii), Rules of the Supreme Court, has incorporated language similar to the federal law.
VAWA does not prohibit consolidation of cases, but Rule 5 does. However, if a domestic relations case and a protective order case are joined for hearing, then the court must take great care to ensure that no references to the protective order are published on the court’s public access website. A family law minute entry cannot refer to the existence of a protective order if the minute entry is available to the public on the Internet. The case record, even if it displays only case data, cannot include the plaintiff’s surname, and even the case title must be redacted to shield the plaintiff’s surname. There is a distinction between case information available on the Internet and case information available at the courthouse. A person asking to inspect the record at a courthouse will have access to the plaintiff’s name in the protective order proceeding, and possibly that person’s address, unless the court has made this information confidential.