Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 25, 2025

Rappaport v. Guardian Life Insurance Company of America

Judge
Rochon
Docket
1:22-cv-08100
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureInsurance
In one sentence

In Rappaport v. Guardian, Judge Rochon temporarily granted a motion to seal documents, leaving whether they remain sealed for the bench trial.

Who this affects

Jason Rappaport and Guardian Life Insurance Company of America; the documents at issue are temporarily sealed.

What happened

In Rappaport v. Guardian Life Insurance Company of America, Jason Rappaport asked the court to temporarily file under seal documents that Guardian had marked confidential. The documents were attached to filings submitted for the underlying bench trial.

Rappaport did not object to temporary sealing but argued that Guardian had not shown enough to overcome the public’s right to access court documents. He also argued that the documents were relevant to whether K-1 earnings are included in insured earnings and that they had not been available earlier.

The court temporarily granted the motion to seal and said it would reconsider whether the materials should remain sealed when deciding the bench-trial issues. Judge Rochon directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at Docket 126.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rappaport v. Guardian Life Insurance Company of America · No. 1:22-cv-08100
Judge
Rochon
Date
Feb. 25, 2025

Background

Jason Rappaport filed a letter motion asking to submit under seal documents that Guardian Life Insurance Company of America had marked confidential. The documents were attached to materials supporting Rappaport’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law and accompanying legal memorandum for the underlying bench trial.

Rappaport stated that he did not object to the documents being filed under seal, but disputed that Guardian had made a sufficient showing to overcome the presumption that judicial documents should be publicly accessible. Rappaport also disputed any argument that the documents were irrelevant or should not be considered because they were outside the administrative record. According to the letter, the documents concerned whether K-1 earnings are included in insured earnings and were not provided to Rappaport until after Guardian issued its final decision on appeal and remand.

Court’s Action

The court temporarily granted the motion to seal. It stated that it would reassess whether the materials should remain sealed when deciding the issues presented in the underlying bench trial. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at Docket 126. The order does not state the final disposition of the sealing question or the underlying insurance dispute.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.