Murdoch Family Succession Battle to Remain Behind Closed Doors
A succession battle that will determine stewardship of Rupert Murdoch’s right-wing media empire will not be open to the public, a court has ruled.
Nevada probate commissioner Edmund J. Gorman Jr. on Thursday denied a petition by a coalition of media organizations, including The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Associated Press, to unseal court proceedings and records. He found that hearings will remain closed off to prevent the disclosure of confidential information.
More from The Hollywood Reporter
“A family trust like the one at issue in this case, even when it is a stockholder in publicly traded companies, is essentially a private legal arrangement,” the order stated.
The legal battle relates to a petition by Murdoch to amend the irrevocable family trust to ensure that his eldest son, Lachlan, remains in charge of his vast collection of publications and TV networks after his death. The trust, as currently constructed, gives equal voting shares to the four oldest children. Proceedings are set to start on Sept. 16.
In Nevada probate court, any filings dealing with trust instruments, petitions and fiscal documents filed by fiduciaries can remain sealed. It’s among the primary reasons Murdoch chose Nevada to file his petition to amend the trust.
To require the unsealing of records that the public or media asserted a right to access would be to “strip the parties’ right to seal confidential information,” the court found. It pointed to a prior order in which it deemed financial and business details as within the domain of an individual’s personal life.
“A family trust like the one at issue in this case, even when it is a stockholder in publicly traded companies, is essentially a private legal arrangement, as the applicable sealing statues recognize,” Gorman wrote. He cited Nevada statutes, meant to avoid public proceedings, that were designed to protect the privacy of information related to an individual’s wealth management and succession planning.
Revealing such information, the court said, can facilitate identity theft, fraud or public embarrassment, the court added. It also said there are security concerns.
“In addition to the protection of privacy interests that outweigh the public’s right to access these proceedings, the court also recognizes that several of the parties and witnesses in this case—as even movants concede—are well known to the public and the subjects of intense media and public scrutiny,” the order stated. “These parties warrant additional security measures to ensure that their own physical access to the courts is not infringed, and that malicious actors who might wish them harm cannot use their appearances in this probate court to facilitate that harm.”
Some information about the largely secret case has been made available. This includes the name, date it was filed and an index of all the documents filed.
“Though the information made available by the clerk of the court has been limited, the existence of this case is not hidden,” the order stated.
The only further documents that will be made public are documents related to an appeal of the court’s sealing order. The judge also said that the public has a right to know the lawyers involved in the case, as well as any party not directly involved in proceedings that moves to intervene.
Best of The Hollywood Reporter
Sign up for THR's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.