Snook v. Valley OB-GYN Clinic, P.C.

Filing 17

ORDER Directing Supplemental Briefing and Scheduling Hearing. Set Motion and Deadlines/Hearings as to 16 Joint MOTION to Dismiss and Approve Settlement: (Supplemental briefing due by 11/21/2014, Motion Hearing set for 1/8/2015 03:30 PM before District Judge Thomas L. Ludington) Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (SGam)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
NORTHERN DIVISION
CHRISTINE SNOOK,
Plaintiff,
v

Case No. 14-cv-12302
Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

VALLEY OB-GYN CLINIC, P.C.,
Defendant.
__________________________________________/
ORDER DIRECTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING AND SCHEDULING HEARING
On June 11, 2014, Plaintiff Christine Snook filed suit against Defendant Valley OB-GYN
Clinic, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 207 and the
Michigan Elliott Larsen Civil Rights Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.2201.
On October 29, 2014, the parties filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss and Approve Settlement.
The parties represent that they “have reached a settlement and seek court approval.” Although
court approval is necessary for settlement agreements concerning FLSA claims, “[t]he parties
wish for the terms of their settlement to remain confidential” and therefore are agreeable to
“submit[ing] the Settlement Agreement to the court at the Motion Hearing for an in camera
review . . . .”
Although the parties wish for the settlement terms to remain confidential, this court’s
business is of public record. See Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. F.T.C., 710 F.2d 1165,
1177 (6th Cir. 1983) (noting the “long-established legal tradition” of open access to court
documents). As the Court of Appeals explained in In re Knoxville News-Sentinel Co., Inc., 723

F.2d 470 (6th Cir. 1983), there is a “presumptive right” of public access to court records which
permits inspection and copying:
The recognition of this right of access goes back to the Nineteenth Century, when,
in Ex Parte Drawbraugh, 2 App.D.C. 404 (1894), the D.C. Circuit stated: “Any
attempt to maintain secrecy, as to the records of this court, would seem to be
inconsistent with the common understanding of what belongs to a public court of
record, to which all persons have the right of access.”
Id. at 474 (citations omitted).
Despite this presumptive right of public access, trial courts have the discretion to seal
their records “when interests of privacy outweigh the public’s right to know.” Knoxville NewsSentinel, 723 F.2d at 474. To have confidential information in a court record kept under seal, the
movant must make a specific showing that disclosure of information would result in some sort of
serious competitive or financial harm. Tinman v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan, 176 F.
Supp. 2d 743 (E.D. Mich. 2001); see also Eastern District of Michigan Local Rule 5.3.
Here, the parties have not provided an explanation for keeping the settlement agreement’s
terms confidential. See Bouzzi v. F & J Pine Rest., LLC, 841 F. Supp. 2d 635, 639 (E.D.N.Y.
2012) (“a judicially approved FLSA settlement agreement should not be filed under seal, except
in the very limited circumstance where parties can make a substantial showing that their need to
seal the agreement outweighs the strong presumption of public access that attaches to such
judicial documents.”). Therefore, the parties will be directed to file supplemental briefing
explaining why the “interests of privacy outweigh the public’s right to know” in this matter. The
supplemental briefing should also address, of course, the requirements in E.D. L.R. 5.3, which
governs the procedure for filing items under seal.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that a hearing on the parties’ Joint Motion to Dismiss and
Approve Settlement (ECF No. 16) is set for January 8, 2015 at 3:30 p.m.

-2-

It is further ORDERED that the parties are DIRECTED to file—either jointly or
independently—supplemental briefing providing an explanation for keeping the settlement
agreement’s terms confidential on or before November 21, 2014.

s/Thomas L. Ludington
THOMAS L. LUDINGTON
United States District Judge
Dated: October 31, 2014

PROOF OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served
upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first
class U.S. mail on October 31, 2014.
s/Tracy A. Jacobs
TRACY A. JACOBS

-3-