Scholastic Inc. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company
- Jesse Furman
- 1:23-cv-03485
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Scholastic v. St. Paul, Judge Furman temporarily granted the parties’ sealing motion, reserving a final decision until the underlying motions are decided.
Scholastic Inc. and St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, whose requested materials may be filed temporarily under seal or in redacted form while the court considers the underlying motions.
What happened
Scholastic Inc. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company concerns the parties’ joint request to keep certain materials secret or partly hidden from the public while they file expert and summary-judgment motions. The materials relate to an earlier lawsuit, settlement discussions, and Scholastic’s defense strategy.
The parties sought protection for settlement communications, settlement terms, information about Scholastic’s strategy, and communications involving Scholastic, its insurers, brokers, and lawyers. They argued that disclosure could violate confidentiality obligations, reveal privileged or attorney work-product materials, and harm Scholastic’s competitive position.
Judge Furman temporarily granted the motion to seal. The court said it would decide whether the materials should remain sealed or redacted when it decides the underlying motions, and directed the clerk to terminate ECF Nos. 97 and 98.
The detailed version
- Scholastic Inc. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company · No. 1:23-cv-03485
- Jesse Furman
- Dec. 16, 2024
Background
The parties jointly asked for permission to file certain documents under seal or in redacted form in connection with their Daubert motions and motions for summary judgment. The request concerned materials from discovery that were covered by a confidentiality and protective order. The order protected previously undisclosed financial information, business and marketing information, trade secrets, proprietary information, competitively sensitive information, and other information whose disclosure could harm a producing party’s business.
The protective order also incorporated terms from a protective order in an earlier related proceeding. Under the present order, Scholastic could designate certain materials from that proceeding as confidential.
Materials at Issue
The parties sought sealing or redaction for three categories of materials: communications about negotiations of a settlement in the earlier related proceeding; documents and communications containing Scholastic’s strategy or considerations in defending and settling that proceeding; and communications among Scholastic, its insurance companies, and its brokers that Scholastic maintained were protected by attorney-client privilege and the common-interest exception.
The joint letter argued that settlement communications and terms could be sealed to protect confidential negotiations and prevent competitive harm. It also asserted that Scholastic’s defense and settlement strategy was primarily protected by the work-product doctrine, which generally protects materials prepared for litigation, and that disclosure could reveal how Scholastic valued claims and approached settlement.
Ruling
The court granted the motion to seal temporarily. It reserved a final decision on whether the materials would remain sealed or redacted until it decided the underlying motions. The clerk was directed to terminate ECF Nos. 97 and 98. The order did not make a final determination that all requested materials would remain sealed.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.