Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 28, 2024

Chubb Global Markets Lloyds Syndicate 2488 and others following on Policy…

Full caption

Chubb Global Markets Lloyds Syndicate 2488 and others following on Policy B0180PC2110569 v. CMA-CGM S.A.

Judge
Lewis Liman
Docket
1:23-cv-05562
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
8
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Chubb Global Markets Lloyds Syndicate 2488 v. CMA-CGM S.A., Judge Liman entered a discovery protective order governing confidential materials.

Who this affects

The parties, their representatives, agents, experts, consultants, insurers, counsel and litigation-support providers, third parties providing discovery, witnesses and other approved recipients, and anyone with actual or constructive notice of the protective order.

What happened

Chubb Global Markets Lloyds Syndicate 2488 and other insurers, CMA-CGM S.A., and APM Terminals Elizabeth, LLC were involved in this case. Through their lawyers, all parties asked the court to protect certain nonpublic information exchanged during discovery.

The court found good cause for a tailored protective order. The order limits how designated confidential discovery materials may be disclosed and used, identifies people who may receive them, and sets procedures for challenging confidentiality designations and handling subpoenas. It also explains that a confidentiality designation does not automatically permit filing material under seal.

Judge Lewis J. Liman entered the protective order on August 28, 2024. The order allows confidential materials to be used only for this case and related appeals, requires protection of personal identifying information, provides for return or destruction of confidential materials after the case ends, and states that willful violations may lead to contempt sanctions.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Chubb Global Markets Lloyds Syndicate 2488 and others following on Policy… · No. 1:23-cv-05562
Judge
Lewis Liman
Date
Aug. 28, 2024

Background

The parties, through counsel, jointly requested a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). They represented that discovery would involve confidential documents and information whose public disclosure could harm the producing person or a third party owed confidentiality. The order applies to the parties, their representatives, agents, experts, consultants, third parties providing discovery, and other people with actual or constructive notice of the order.

Confidentiality Designations

A producing person may designate material as “Confidential” only when public disclosure is restricted by law or would harm business, commercial, financial, or personal interests, or interests of a third party owed confidentiality. The order lists previously undisclosed financial information, nonpublic-company ownership or control information, business and marketing plans, personal or intimate information, and other categories later approved by the court. It establishes procedures for marking documents and deposition testimony and permits a producing person to correct an earlier failure to designate material as confidential.

Limits on Disclosure and Use

Confidential discovery material generally may be disclosed only to specified recipients, including the parties and their insurers, litigation counsel and support personnel, outside litigation vendors, mediators or arbitrators, authors or recipients identified on a document, potential witnesses, experts, deposition transcription personnel, and the court. Mediators, arbitrators, witnesses, and experts must first sign a nondisclosure agreement in the form attached to the order. Recipients may use the material only to prosecute or defend this action and related appeals, not for business, commercial, or competitive purposes.

Challenges, Sealing, and Personal Information

A party may object to a confidentiality designation or request additional disclosure limits, such as attorneys’-eyes-only treatment in extraordinary circumstances. If the parties cannot resolve the dispute, they must present it to the court under the court’s individual practices. Anyone seeking to file redacted material or material under seal must first obtain permission and follow those practices. The order states that confidentiality does not create a presumption that material will be sealed and warns that the court may refuse confidential treatment, especially for material introduced at trial or supporting or opposing summary judgment. Personal identifying information exchanged in discovery must be kept secure, and a recipient experiencing a data breach must promptly notify the producing person and cooperate in addressing it.

Disposition and Continuing Effect

Judge Lewis J. Liman ordered the protective order. It remains effective after the litigation ends. Within 30 days after final disposition, confidential discovery material and copies must be returned to the producing person or destroyed if the producing person permits. The court retains jurisdiction as necessary to enforce the order, and willful violations may result in contempt punishment.

The authoritative version

Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.