THE O.J. SIMPSON MURDER TRIAL : Records Sealed in Marcia Clark’s Child Custody Dispute : Court: An order granting her request cites the need to protect two young sons. The ruling is criticized by her estranged husband’s attorney.

Granting Marcia Clark’s request, a Superior Court commissioner has closed all court records and hearings dealing with her child custody dispute and also barred those involved in the case from publicly discussing custody issues.

In addition to sealing the custody records in Clark’s divorce case, Commissioner Keith M. Clemens also forbade Marcia Clark and her estranged husband, Gordon Clark, from publicly disclosing information about their two young sons or from commenting on each other’s parenting skills or parenting actions.

The order, made public Wednesday, shuts off the flow of information in a custody dispute that has been cast into the national spotlight. Gordon Clark filed court papers this spring arguing that he should be given primary physical custody of the children because his wife was spending all her time prosecuting the O.J. Simpson case and was rarely home with the boys.

Saying his wife’s work schedule has apparently changed, Gordon Clark has since indicated that he would be satisfied with joint custody, consisting of alternate weekends and two overnight visits a week.

Clemens’ order won praise from Marcia Clark’s attorney and condemnation from Gordon Clark’s.

“Overall, we are very pleased and gratified,” said Judith R. Forman, who argued in court last week that the children would be harmed by continued public discussion of the details of the custody battle. She called Clemens’ ruling “careful and very sensitive to the children.”

Stephen F. Rohde, one of Gordon Clark’s attorneys, blasted the decision as an “unprecedented and unconstitutional prior restraint of free speech.

“Marcia Clark is a public figure and a public official,” said Rohde, who specializes in 1st Amendment issues. “Commissioner Clemens severely restricts the ability of Gordon Clark and his counsel to publicly discuss the issues in this case. The ruling is vague and uncertain.”

Rohde complained that the ban on public comment about parenting skills was potentially so far-reaching that “virtually anything could later be construed as falling within that category.”

Attorney Roslyn Soudry, who is representing Gordon Clark in the divorce, said the ruling left her unsure of what she could and could not say about the case. She said she and Rohde had not decided whether they will appeal the decision.

Gordon Clark and his attorneys have opposed sealing the case. Citing Marcia Clark’s mention of child care duties at one point during the Simpson trial, they have argued that Gordon Clark should not be restrained from telling his side of the story.

Marcia Clark has consistently refused to comment on the custody battle, while Gordon Clark has granted several interviews and recently sold an unflattering, two-part story about Marcia Clark to the Globe, a tabloid, for an undisclosed sum. The article said the story payment was being used to pay his legal fees.

In an 18-page ruling, Clemens recognized a public interest in the issues raised by the case but found it was outweighed by a need to protect the children, ages 3 and 5, from learning details of the case that could “very likely be detrimental” to their social and emotional well-being.

Glen H. Schwartz, chairman of the family law section of the Los Angeles County Bar Assn., said Clemens’ ruling was “unusual but not unprecedented.

“I don’t think Commissioner Clemens is in any way violative of any laws or constitutional rights,” Schwartz said. “I don’t have a problem with the court keeping litigants in the courtroom and limiting discussion relevant to the kids.”