Smith v. Barrow Neurological Institute et al

Filing 293

ORDER granting 287 Motion to Seal Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 10/31/12. (MAP)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
Leanna Smith,
9
Plaintiff,
10
vs.
11
Barrow Neurological Institute, et al.,
12
Defendants.
13

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 10-01632-PHX-FJM
ORDER

14

We have before us plaintiff's motion to file under seal her response to defendants'

15

motion for summary judgment (doc. 287). A party seeking to seal records must provide

16

compelling reasons which outweigh the general history of access and public policies favoring

17

disclosure. Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass'n, 605 F.3d 665, 679 (9th Cir. 2010).

18

Plaintiff requests that her response be filed under seal because the exhibits consist of

19

juvenile court records, a police report involving allegations defendants made to Child

20

Protective Services ("CPS"), and deposition transcripts of CPS workers.

21

favors the protection of minors' privacy. Indeed, juvenile court records and proceedings are

22

generally confidential. See, e.g., A.R.S. §§ 8-208(F), 8-537(A). Records relating to

23

investigations conducted by Child Protective Services are confidential. A.R.S. § 41-1959(A).

24

Therefore, compelling reasons exist for sealing plaintiff's response.

25
26
27
28

Public policy

IT IS ORDERED GRANTING plaintiff's motion to file her response to
defendants' motion for summary judgment under seal (doc. 287).
DATED this 31st day of October, 2012.