Stocking v. Newmark Knight Frank Valuation & Advisory, LLC
Filing
173
ORDER granting 171 Letter Motion to Seal. Newmark's request to file its reply under seal is granted. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 1/29/2025) (jca)
Stacey L. Pitcher
Direct Dial: 917.994.2551
stacey.pitcher@obermayer.com
www.obermayer.com
January 28, 2025
Newmark's request to file its reply under seal is granted.
VIA ECF
Honorable Edgardo Ramos
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
40 Foley Square
New York, NY 10007
Re:
Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP
60 East 42nd Street | 40th Floor
New York, NY 10165
SO ORDERED.
Edgardo Ramos, U.S.D.J.
Dated: January 29, 2025
New York, New York
Maria Stocking v. Newmark Knight Frank Valuation & Advisory, LLC
Case No. 1:22-cv-07347-ER
Dear Judge Ramos:
Pursuant to Rule 3(ii) of Your Honor’s Individual Practices, Newmark Knight Frank
Valuation & Advisory, LLC (“Newmark”) respectfully submits this letter motion to request that
Newmark’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Objection to its Motion to Compel be filed under seal. The
request to seal these two documents is submitted to preserve the confidentiality of Maria
Stocking’s (“Plaintiff”) medical treatment and diagnoses as required under the Confidentiality
Agreement that was executed by Plaintiff’s prior counsel. (See Doc. 100).
The Court “may order that a filing be made under seal.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(d). Courts
have granted the sealing of documents relating to a party’s medical information. See J.M. v.
United Healthcare Ins., 2023 WL 6542179, *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 29, 2023)
(granting motion to seal entire Administrative Record, “which contains highly sensitive personal
and medical information...”); Molina v. Brann, 2022 WL 18144068, *7 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 16,
2022) (the sealing of Plaintiff’s medical records “is necessary to protect Plaintiff’s privacy
interest in his medical information and that the sealing request is narrowly tailored to achieve
that result.”); Valentini v. Grp. Health Inc., 2020 WL 7646892, *2 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2020)
(“plaintiffs’ privacy interests...outweigh the presumption of public access at this time”).
The Reply brief quotes from one of Plaintiff’s medical records. Pursuant to the
Confidentiality Agreement, “Confidential” is defined as “any Discovery Material containing
medical . . . information . . . .” (See Doc. 100, ¶2(a)). The agreement further provides that, if
“Confidential” discovery materials are to be included in pleadings or documents filed with or
otherwise disclosed to the Court, such papers shall be filed under seal. (See Doc. 100, ¶13).
In an effort to comply with the Confidentiality Agreement and in order to prevent public
access to information relating to Plaintiff’s medical care, Newmark respectfully requests that this
Court seal Newmark’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Objection to Newmark’s Motion to Compel.
We thank the Court for its attention to this matter.
Very truly yours,
Stacey L. Pitcher
Cc:
Maria Stocking (via e-mail)
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?