Smith v. Barrow Neurological Institute et al

Filing 328

ORDER granting 323 Plaintiff's Motion to File her Reply Under Seal. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 1/14/13. (MAP)

Download PDF
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 reply in support of 15 plaintiff's motion to strike Exhibit "A" (doc. 323). No response has been filed. A party 16 seeking to seal records must provide compelling reasons which outweigh the general history 17 of access and public policies favoring disclosure. Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass'n, 605 F.3d 18 665, 679 (9th Cir. 2010). 19 Plaintiff requests the sealing of her reply because it contains and discusses evidence 20 and exhibits that consist of juvenile court records, police reports, and Child Protective 21 Services (CPS) reports. Public policy favors the protection of minors' privacy. Indeed, 22 juvenile court records and proceedings are generally confidential. See, e.g., A.R.S. §§ 8- 23 208(F), 8-537(A). Records relating to investigations conducted by CPS are confidential. 24 A.R.S. § 41-1959(A). Therefore, compelling reasons exist for sealing plaintiff's motion. IT IS ORDERED GRANTING plaintiff's motion to file her reply under seal (doc. 25 26 27 28 323). DATED this 14th day of January, 2013.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?