Tsavaris v. Savannah Law School, LLC et al
Filing
50
ORDER denying 47 Motion to Seal Document without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher L. Ray on 6/24/2019. (pts)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
MAGGIE TSAVARIS,
Plaintiff,
v.
SAVANNAH LAW SCHOOL, LLC,
et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
CV418-125
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
Plaintiff seeks to permanently seal the Declaration of Caprice
Roberts (doc. 44-1) pursuant to S.D. Ga. L. R. 79.7 and the parties’
consent protective order, because it “contains sensitive information —
specifically, ‘a performance review of the Plaintiff that was internally
confidential at Savannah Law School.’” Doc. 47 at 1. But the declaration
merely references that performance review. See doc. 44-1. It does not
extensively quote from the review, or any other confidential material.
Rather, it briefly explains Savannah Law Schools’ teacher evaluation
process and Roberts’ own review of plaintiff’s October 2013 performance
review authored by Professor Elizabeth Berenguer, with an attestation
that the declarant “did not substantively change any criticisms she
identified[.]” Id. at ¶ 8-11. The closest it comes to a direct quotation is
one of a January 2014 email — not the performance review itself. Id. at
¶ 11. Plaintiff offers no explanation for why this declaration ought to be
kept off the public docket, much less permanently.
The
common-law
right
of
access
“establish[es]
a
general
presumption that criminal and civil actions should be conducted publicly”
and “includes the right to inspect and copy public records and
documents.” Chi. Tribune Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d
1304, 1311 (11th Cir. 2001). It is “an essential component of our system
of justice” and “is instrumental in securing the integrity of the process.”
Id. Nothing in plaintiff’s motion, aside from a reference to defendants’
granted motion to seal the actual performance review and file only
redacted versions to the public docket (see docs. 40 & 45), hints at why
the Court should keep this declaration shielded in perpetuity. Plaintiff’s
motion, in other words, is DENIED without prejudice. Doc. 47.
SO ORDERED, this
24th day of June, 2019.
y
,
______________________________
________________________
_
_
_
CHRISTOPHER L. RAY
HRISTOPHER
S
HE R
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
UD
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
2
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?