N.M.I. et al v. Sadowski et al

Filing 9

ORDER granting 6 Motion to Seal; denying 6 Motion to Seal Case. I grant those aspects of plaintiffs' motion that seek to amend this case's caption to disclose only the minor plaintiffs' initials. In addition, to further protect the identities of the infant plaintiffs in future filings, the parties must also use initials in place of the guardian plaintiff's full name and the parties must use the caption herein when filing papers with the Court, and redact any other inf ormation that would tend to identify the infant plaintiffs, including the day and month of their birth. The parties are granted leave to file under seal any medical records of the infant plaintiffs without further order of the Court. The parties ar e further directed to confer and file a proposed protective order governing the use of materials in this litigation that qualify for confidential treatment under applicable law. Finally, the parties must submit to chambers hard or electronic copies of the notice of removal and the papers attached thereto with the initials of plaintiffs substituted for their full names. This Court will arrange for the redacted documents to be filed to be publicly available in the Clerk's Office and the Court's electronic case filing system. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to conform the docket sheet to the caption herein. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Marilyn D. Go on 3/16/2015. (Proujansky, Josh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X
N.M.I., individually and as natural
guardian of T.R.T. an infant and R.T.
an infant,

ORDER
15-cv-00856 (JBW)(MDG)

Plaintiffs,
- against ALFONS SADOWSKI AS AN EXECUTOR OF
ESTATE OF MARIE HAINES a/k/a MARIE
TONKONOD a/k/a MARIE TONKONOG a/k/a
MARIE TONKONOH; PROACTIVE MANAGEMENT,
INC. and HORIZON REALTY OF NEW YORK
LLC,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X

Plaintiffs, with the defendants' consent, move to amend the
caption of the complaint in this personal injury action to protect
the full names of the minor plaintiffs, redact the minor
plaintiffs' month and day of birth from all court filings and to
seal the entire record in this action.

BACKGROUND
Defendant Horizon Realty LLC removed this action from the
Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Queens, on
February 18, 2015.

See ct. doc. 1.

The complaint filed in state

court and attached to the notice of removal includes the full name
of the infant plaintiffs.
On February 19, 2015, this Court issued an electronic order
advising the parties of the requirements of Rule 5.2 of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and requiring them to confer and
file a letter by February 26, 2015 advising whether they wish to
proceed in this action with the minors' names redacted or to be
relieved of the requirements of Rule 5.2.

This Court further

directed the Clerk's Office to restrict access to the notice of
removal to the parties in this action.

In response, plaintiff

filed the instant motion on consent of all parties.
DISCUSSION
The press and the public have a "qualified First Amendment
right to attend judicial proceedings and to access certain
judicial documents" and docket sheets.

See Hartford Courant Co.

v. Pellegrino, 371 F.3d 49, 59 (2d Cir. 2004); see also Newsday
LLC v. County of Nassau, 730 F.3d 156, 163 (2d Cir. 2013) (First
Amendment right of access "applies to 'civil trials and to their
related proceedings and records'") (quoting N.Y. Civil Liberties
Union v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth., 684 F.3d 286, 298 (2d Cir. 2012)).
Thus, there is a strong presumption against sealing court records
from the public.
597-99 (1978).

See Nixon v. Warner Comm'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589,

Such a presumption may be overcome by

demonstrating that sealing will further substantial interests.
See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 126 (2d Cir.
2006).

Motions to seal must be "carefully and skeptically

review[ed] . . .

to insure that there really is an extraordinary

circumstance or compelling need" to shield the materials from
-2-

access by the public.
27 (2d Cir. 1994).

See In re Orion Pictures Corp., 21 F.3d 24,

A court must make "specific findings on the

record demonstrating that closure is essential to preserve higher
values and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest."

U.S. v.

Doe, 63 F.3d 121, 128 (2d Cir. 1995); see Press-Enterprise Co. v.
Superior Court, 464 U.S. 501, 505 (1984); Lugosch, 435 F.3d at
120.
Plaintiffs have not established that it is necessary to bar
all public access to this case or to seal all documents filed to
date.

Even if plaintiff had articulated a compelling need for

sealing any document filed to date, a blanket sealing of the
entire case would be inappropriate.

See City of Hartford v.

Chase, 942 F.2d 130, 137 (2d Cir. 1991) ("[t]his determination
should not be made on a file-by-file basis, or even on a
stipulation of the parties, but instead, the district court,
itself, should review each document that the parties seek to have
sealed"); Rossi v. West Haven Bd. of Educ., 2005 WL 839661, at *1
(D. Conn. 2005) ("[a] blanket sealing order . . . would rarely, if
ever, be appropriate"); Livecchi v. Rochester Police Dep't, 2004
WL 1737379, at *1 (W.D.N.Y. 2004).

Plaintiffs' privacy concerns

are mitigated by the procedures provided for in Rule 5.2 as
discussed below.

Significantly, plaintiffs filed their motion

only after this Court's February 19, 2015 order and after the
complaint, which disclosed the minor plaintiffs' full names, was

-3-

available to the public in the Clerk's Office, on the Court's
electronic filing system and in state court records.
Rule 5.2 provides that certain information must be redacted
from all filings and that other information may be redacted for
good cause shown.

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a), (e).

Accordingly,

I grant those aspects of plaintiffs' motion that seek to amend
this case's caption to disclose only the minor plaintiffs'
initials.

In addition, to further protect the identities of the

infant plaintiffs in future filings, the parties must also use
initials in place of the guardian plaintiff's full name and the
parties must use the caption above when filing papers with the
Court, and redact any other information that would tend to
identify the infant plaintiffs, including the day and month of
their birth.
The parties are granted leave to file under seal any medical
records of the infant plaintiffs without further order of the
Court.

The parties are further directed to confer and file a

proposed protective order governing the use of materials in this
litigation that qualify for confidential treatment under
applicable law.
Finally, the parties must submit to chambers hard or
electronic copies of the notice of removal and the papers attached
thereto with the initials of plaintiffs substituted for their full
names.

This Court will arrange for the redacted documents to be

-4-

filed to be publicly available in the Clerk's Office and the
Court's electronic case filing system.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to conform the
docket sheet to the above caption.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 16, 2015
Brooklyn, New York
/s/______________________________
MARILYN D. GO
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

-5-