Peterson v. Washington County Jail et al

Filing 155

ORDER granting 104 Joint Motion Regarding Continued Sealing; granting 149 Joint Motion Regarding Continued Sealing; and granting 150 Joint Motion Regarding Continued Sealing. Docket Entries 116, 116-1, 116-2, 130-4 130-13, 130-14, and 1 36 will be UNSEALED in accordance with the Local Rules. Docket Entries 100, 100-2, 100-3, 100-4, 100-5, 100-6, 100-7, 100-8, 100-9, 100-10, 100-11, 100-12, 100-13, 100-14, 130, 130-1, 130-2, 130-3, 130-5, 130-6, 130-7, 130-8, 130-9, 130-10, 130-11 , 130-12, 130-15, 136-1, and 136-2 will remain SEALED. Order on continued sealing becomes final on 7/2/2021 unless further timely submissions are filed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright on 6/4/2021. (SK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
BRANDON PETERSON,

Case No. 18-cv-2640 (DWF/ECW)

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

WASHINGTON COUNTY, et al.
Defendants.
This matter is before the Court upon the parties’ Joint Motions Regarding Continuing
Sealing (Dkts. 104, 149, 150) pursuant to Local Rule 5.6(d) concerning documents filed
under seal (Dkts. 100, 100-1, 100-2, 100-3, 100-4, 100-5, 100-6, 100-7, 100-8, 100-9, 10010, 100-11, 100-12, 100-13, 100-14, 116, 116-1, 116-2, 130, 130-1, 130-2, 130-3, 130-4,
130-5, 130-6, 130-7, 130-8, 130-9, 130-10, 130-11, 130-12, 130-13, 130-14, 130-15, 136,
136-1, and 136-2).
The parties agree that Docket Entries 116, 116-1, 116-2, 130-4, 130-13, 130-14, and
136 should be unsealed. Therefore, these documents will be unsealed.
The parties also agree that Docket Entries 100, 100-2, 100-3, 100-4, 100-5, 100-6,
100-7, 100-8, 100-9, 100-10, 100-11, 100-12, 100-13, and 100-14 should continue to be
sealed as they contain personally identifiable information or the name of non-party inmates.
(Dkt. 104.) Based on these representations and the Court’s review of the documents, the
Court concludes that the need to maintain the information in these docket entries under seal
1

outweighs the public’s right of access. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2; D. Minn. LR 5.6(d) advisory
committee’s note; IDT Corp. v. eBay, 709 F.3d 1220, 1224 (8th Cir. 2013).
The parties disagree as to continued sealing of Docket Entries 100-1, 130, 130-1, 1302, 130-3, 130-5, 130-6, 130-7, 130-8, 130-9, 130-10, 130-11, 130-12, 130-15, 136-1, and
136-2.
With respect to Docket Entry 101-1, it is Plaintiff’s position that this document
contains sensitive health information and that his interest in maintaining the confidentiality of
discovery containing his health information outweighs any public interest of access to this
information because it was filed in conjunction with a pretrial motion brought by the
opposing party relating solely to discovery—not the merits. While Plaintiff acknowledges
that he has placed certain aspects of his healthcare at issue, he contends that does not mean
that the information is not confidential, as a waiver of any applicable privilege is a separate
consideration from whether personal health information asserted solely in response to a
discovery motion should remain confidential. Defendants counter that Dkt. 100-1 should not
remain sealed because Plaintiff placed his health directly at issue in this case. While a party
may waive medical privilege when a party places his medical condition at issue (see
Sandoval v. Am. Bldg. Maint. Indus., Inc., 267 F.R.D. 257, 267-69 (D. Minn. 2007)), that
applies to an opposing party’s right to access to information, and does not prohibit a court
under Rule 26(b) from protecting “a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment,
oppression, or undue burden.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). Given that the medical information at
issue was submitted as part of a non-dipositive motion, the Court finds that the public’s

2

interest to access does not outweigh Plaintiff’s privacy interests with respect to his medical
information. Therefore, Docket Entry 100-1 shall remain sealed.
The parties also have similar disagreements with respect to Docket Entries 130 (video
from Plaintiff’s incarceration), 130-1, 130-2, 130-3, 130-5, 130-6, 130-7, 130-8, 130-9, 13010, 130-11, 130-12, 130-15, 136-1, and 136-2. Plaintiff argues that these entries contain
information relating to his health, incarceration, and/or personally identifiable information, as
well as information, related to non-party inmates. Plaintiff has offered proposed redacted
versions for Docket Entries 130-2, 130-3, 130-5, 130-6, 130-7, 130-8, 130-9, 130-10, 130-11,
130-12, 130-15, 136-1 and 136-2 for public filling. (See Dkts. 149-1, 149-2, 150-1 through
150-11.) Defendants’ position is that the public’s right to access in these documents
outweighs the Plaintiff’s right to confidentiality and that any personally identifiable
information can be removed as appropriate under Rule 5.2 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. 1
The Court has reviewed Docket Entries 130, 130-1, 130-2, 130-3, 130-5, 130-6, 130-7,
130-8, 130-9, 130-10, 130-11, 130-12, 130-15, 136-1, and 136-2 and finds that the need to
protect Plaintiff’s medically related information, as well as information dealing with nonparties, outweighs public’s interest in accessing this information given the present procedural
posture of this case, especially in light of the fact that the majority of these documents now
have publicly available redacted versions. Since these documents were filed in conjunction
with non-dispositive motions, the Court emphasizes that this decision is not determinative as

The Court notes the Rule 5.2 only pertains to the redaction of social security numbers,
birthdates, financial account numbers, and the names of minors. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a).
3
1

to whether this information will remain sealed in the future to the extent that it is filed and
considered by the Court with respect to a future dispositive motion. See In re Baycol Prod.
Litig., No. 08-CV-5758 (MJD/ECW), 2021 WL 1893897, at *4 (D. Minn. May 11, 2021).
ORDER
Based upon on the motion and the documents filed under seal, as well as all the files,
records, and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motions Regarding Continued
Sealing (Dkts. 104, 149, 150) are GRANTED as follows:
1.

Docket Entries 116, 116-1, 116-2, 130-4 130-13, 130-14, and 136 will be
UNSEALED in accordance with the Local Rules.

2.

Docket Entries 100, 100-2, 100-3, 100-4, 100-5, 100-6, 100-7, 100-8, 100-9,
100-10, 100-11, 100-12, 100-13, 100-14, 130, 130-1, 130-2, 130-3, 130-5, 1306, 130-7, 130-8, 130-9, 130-10, 130-11, 130-12, 130-15, 136-1, and 136-2 will
remain SEALED.

DATED: June 4, 2021

s/Elizabeth Cowan Wright
ELIZABETH COWAN WRIGHT
United States Magistrate Judge

4