(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, it is the policy of the State of California that confidential settlement agreements are disfavored in any civil action the factual foundation for which establishes a cause of action for a violation of the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (Chapter 11(commencing with Section 15600) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code).
§ 2017.310.Confidential settlement agreements; recognition or enforcement by court;
Title 4. Civil Discovery Act · Chapter 2. Scope of Discovery · Article 3. Violation of the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act · Enacted 2004 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceSection 2017.310 declares confidential settlement agreements disfavored in elder or dependent-adult abuse cases and bars a court from enforcing confidentiality absent a showing of privilege, a lack of abuse evidence, or demonstrated prejudice that redaction cannot cure, while still permitting confidentiality over a settlement's dollar amount.
Full Text of § 2017.310
(b) Provisions of a confidential settlement agreement described in subdivision (a) may not be recognized or enforced by the court absent a showing of any of the following:
(1) The information is privileged under existing law.
(2) The information is not evidence of abuse of an elder or dependent adult, as described in Sections 15610.30, 15610.57, and 15610.63 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(3) The party seeking to uphold the confidentiality of the information has demonstrated that there is a substantial probability that prejudice will result from the disclosure and that the party's interest in the information cannot be adequately protected through redaction.
(c) Nothing in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (b) permits the sealing or redacting of a defendant's name in any information made available to the public.
(d) Except as expressly provided in this section, nothing in this section is intended to alter, modify, or amend existing law.
(e) Nothing in this section may be deemed to prohibit the entry or enforcement of that part of a confidentiality agreement, settlement agreement, or stipulated agreement between the parties that requires the nondisclosure of the amount of any money paid in a settlement of a claim.
WESTLAW © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1 § 2017.310. Confidential settlement agreements; recognition or enforcement by court; sealing or..., CA CIV PRO § 2017.310
(f) Nothing in this section applies to or affects an action for professional negligence against a health care provider.
Plain-English Summary
Elder and dependent-adult abuse often stays hidden because a settlement quietly seals the facts, and this section pushes back against that pattern. It declares it the policy of California that confidential settlement agreements are disfavored in any civil action whose factual foundation establishes a cause of action under the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act.
That policy has teeth: a court cannot recognize or enforce the confidentiality provisions of such a settlement unless the party defending confidentiality makes one of three showings. The information must be privileged under existing law, or it must not be evidence of the abuse described in the Welfare and Institutions Code, or the party must demonstrate a substantial probability of real prejudice from disclosure that redacting the material cannot adequately address. None of those three grounds, though, ever permits sealing or redacting the defendant's name from information made available to the public.
The section is careful about what it does not touch. It does not otherwise alter existing law beyond what it expressly states, it does not stop parties from keeping the settlement amount confidential, and it has no application at all to a professional negligence action against a health care provider, which is governed by its own separate rules.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is California's stated policy on confidential settlements in elder abuse cases?
That confidential settlement agreements are disfavored in any civil action whose factual foundation establishes a cause of action under the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act.
Can a court still enforce a confidentiality provision in this kind of case?
Only if the party seeking to uphold confidentiality shows the information is privileged, is not evidence of the described abuse, or that disclosure would cause substantial, redaction-proof prejudice.
Can a defendant's name be kept out of public information under this section?
No, none of the three grounds for upholding confidentiality permits sealing or redacting a defendant's name from information made available to the public.
Does this section prevent parties from keeping the settlement amount confidential?
No, the section specifically preserves the ability to keep the dollar amount paid in a settlement confidential.
Does this section apply to a medical malpractice case against a health care provider?
No, it expressly does not apply to or affect an action for professional negligence against a health care provider.
Amendment History
(Added by Stats.2004, c. 182 (A.B.3081), § 23, operative July 1, 2005.)
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from
the West's Annotated California Codes / Thomson Reuters. Enacted by the California Legislature.
Last verified July 29, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: elder abuse confidential settlement californiasealing settlement elder abuse lawsuit