M.M. v. Burke County Public Schools Board of Education et al
Filing
81
ORDER granting 79 Motion to Seal and the Plaintiffs shall be permitted to file documentation supporting the Plaintiff s' Motion for Approval of Minor Settlements under seal. Signed by District Judge Martin Reidinger on 12/11/14. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(emw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL CASE 1:13-cv-00204-MR-DLH
M.M. as Lawful Guardian Ad Litem
of Minor Child, M.G.,
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
BURKE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS )
BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
________________________________ )
)
R.L. as Lawful Guardian Ad Litem
)
of Minor Child, A.L.,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
BURKE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS )
BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
________________________________ )
ORDER TO SEAL
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ Motion to File
Under Seal. [Doc. 79].
The Plaintiffs in these consolidated actions seek leave to file under
seal certain documents in support of their Motion for Approval of Minor
Settlements.
For grounds, the Plaintiffs state that these supporting
documents identify and provide personal and sensitive information
regarding the minor Plaintiffs and members of their families.
These
documents also reference terms of the parties’ settlement agreements, the
details of which the Plaintiffs have agreed to keep confidential.
The
Defendants consent to the Plaintiffs’ motion. [Doc. 79 at 3].
The press and the public have, under both the First Amendment and
the common law, a qualified right of access to judicial documents and
records filed in civil and criminal proceedings. Doe v. Public Citizen, --F.3d ----, 2014 WL 1465728 (4th Cir. Apr. 16, 2014). “The common-law
presumptive right of access extends to all judicial documents and records,
and the presumption can be rebutted only by showing that ‘countervailing
interests heavily outweigh the public interests in access.’” Id. (quoting in
part Rushford v. New Yorker Magazine, Inc., 846 F.2d 249, 253 (4th Cir.
1988)). The First Amendment right of access “may be restricted only if
closure is ‘necessitated by a compelling government interest’ and the
denial of access is ‘narrowly tailored to serve that interest.’” Id. (quoting in
part In re Wash. Post Co., 807 F.2d 383, 390 (4th Cir. 1986)).
When presented with a motion to seal, the law of this Circuit requires
this Court to: “(1) provide public notice of the request to seal and allow
2
interested parties a reasonable opportunity to object, (2) consider less
drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, and (3) provide specific
reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents
and for rejecting the alternatives.” Ashcraft v. Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 288,
302 (4th Cir. 2000).
In the present case, the public has been provided with adequate
notice and an opportunity to object to the Plaintiffs’ motion. The Plaintiffs
filed their motion on November 25, 2014, and it has been accessible to the
public through the Court’s electronic case filing system since that time.
Further, the Plaintiffs have demonstrated that the documents at issue
contain personal information regarding the minor Plaintiffs, as well as terms
of the parties’ confidential settlement agreements, and that the public’s
right of access to such information is substantially outweighed by the
compelling interest in protecting the details of such information from public
disclosure. Finally, having considered less drastic alternatives to sealing
the documents, the Court concludes that sealing of these documents is
narrowly tailored to serve the interest of protecting both the Plaintiffs’
privacy and the confidentiality of the parties’ settlement agreements.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Plaintiffs’ Motion to File
Under Seal [Doc. 79] is GRANTED, and the Plaintiffs shall be permitted to
3
file documentation supporting the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Approval of Minor
Settlements under seal.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: December 11, 2014
4
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?