ALBANY, N.Y., April 10 (Reuters) - New York state court administrators are seeking public comment on a handful of proposed rules, including a measure that would make certain types of electronically-filed court documents more accessible to the public.

The proposal would remove a designation of "secure" from certain e-filed documents, including requests for judicial intervention, bills of costs and proofs of service. Currently, any document labeled "secure" is not made available to the public via the internet, though hard copies are available at county courthouses for cases that have not been sealed.

The proposal "recognizes that the 'secure' designation is not appropriate for certain types of documents...that are designed for broad public notice and by definition do not contain sensitive information" such as Social Security numbers, health information and credit card and banking account numbers, according to a memo released Monday by the Office of Court Administration.

Another proposal would give judges the authority to order settlement conferences or take other action to move stalled foreclosure cases forward.

Starting in late 2010, many plaintiffs began bringing foreclosure actions without filing a proof of service and attorney affirmation, according to a separate OCA memo.

"As a result, a substantial backlog of thousands of foreclosure cases has built up over the last 15 months, leaving many homeowners in a legal limbo," OCA Counsel John McConnell wrote in the memo.

As early as June, the court system is planning to launch a pilot program in Kings County that would identify inactive foreclosure actions. Judges would then have the power to order a settlement conference or refer the case to a special delinquency calendar or a non-profit housing agency.

'DISPARATE TREATMENT'

A third proposed rule would prohibit disbarred, suspended and resigned attorneys from using an informal mediation program to pursue fee disputes. Allowing disciplined and resigned attorneys to bring claims under the Fee Dispute Resolution Program, McConnell wrote in a memo, may be inconsistent with a program rule excluding "claims involving substantial legal questions, including professional malpractice or misconduct."

The proposal would prevent "the potential for disparate treatment of similar cases around the state and resulting harm to the (fee dispute) program's reputation," the memo reads.

Administrators also are seeking to implement a rule that would allow judges to hold a party who violates an automatic order in a matrimonial action in civil contempt.

Automatic orders, which were created by the legislature in 2009, are granted at the onset of a divorce proceeding to prevent a husband or wife from dissipating marital assets. State Supreme Court justices have been split over whether the remedy of civil contempt is available when a spouse violates an automatic order.

Comments on the foreclosure and fee dispute proposals must be received by May 14. Comments on the matrimony and e-filing rules are due by May 24.

(Reporting by Dan Wiessner)

Follow us on Twitter: @ReutersLegal