In re Emma F.
Annotate this CaseThe underlying case here was a child protection case concerning the minor children of Mother and Father, who were parties to a pending marital dissolution proceeding. Father filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, contending that the children were unconstitutionally in the custody of the Commissioner of Children and Families. While the allegations in the habeas petition concerned matters that should have been kept confidential, the petition was temporarily made available to the public because Father filed it electronically as a civil matter rather than as a confidential juvenile matter. When reporters at a Newspaper learned about it, they contacted Mother, who requested an injunction seeking to prohibit the Newspaper from publishing information about the case. The trial court issued an injunction that prohibited the Newspaper from publishing the contents of the habeas petition. The Newspaper appealed. Thereafter, the trial court, sua sponte, vacated the injunction, concluding that it was no longer warranted because of subsequent factual developments in the case. The Supreme Court dismissed this appeal on the grounds of mootness, holding that the trial court’s vacatur order rendered the Newspaper’s appeal moot, and none of the exceptions to the mootness doctrine applied.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.