Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Mar. 3, 2025

Richardson v. The National Basketball Association

Judge
Denise Cote
Docket
1:23-cv-06926
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedureEvidence
In one sentence

In Richardson v. National Basketball Association, Judge Cote received defendants’ sealing request; the provided text contains no court ruling.

Who this affects

The requested sealing or redaction would affect the National Basketball Association, NBA Services Corp., Richardson, nonparty NBA players and referees, other NBA employees, participants in the arbitration hearing, and the public’s access to filings in the case.

What happened

Richardson v. National Basketball Association concerns a request by the National Basketball Association and NBA Services Corp. to keep certain materials from being publicly available in the case.

The defendants asked to seal or redact information about nonparties’ health and personal information, confidential business information, and information from a confidential arbitration hearing. They also asked to restrict related discussions in their court filings.

Judge Cote is identified as the judge, but the provided text is a defense letter-motion and does not state that the court granted or denied the request.

The detailed version

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

Case
Richardson v. The National Basketball Association · No. 1:23-cv-06926
Judge
Denise Cote
Date
Mar. 3, 2025

Nature of the filing

The provided text is a letter-motion from the National Basketball Association and NBA Services Corp. (together, the defendants) asking the court to seal or redact materials filed in support of their motion for summary judgment and their motion to exclude the opinions and testimony of Dr. Harvey A. Risch. The letter is signed by Elise M. Bloom of Proskauer Rose LLP.

Requested sealing

The defendants identified three categories of information for sealing or redaction:

  1. Private information concerning nonparties, including NBA players and referees. The examples include vaccination and infection status, medical or religious exemptions from COVID-19 vaccination policies, private conversations, and some personal addresses or email addresses.
  2. Confidential or proprietary business information, including health and safety protocols for NBA players and referees during the 2020–2021 and 2021–2022 seasons and information about the NBA’s business operations.
  3. Nonpublic information from a Vaccination Exemption Board arbitration hearing between the National Basketball Referees Association, on behalf of Richardson, and NBA Services Corp.

The defendants also requested limited redactions to related discussions in their legal memoranda, their statement of undisputed material facts, and later briefing connected to the motions. They stated that they were not seeking to seal information that Richardson had already publicly filed in the action.

Legal standard described

The letter describes the Second Circuit’s three-step approach to requests for public access to court documents: determining whether the materials are judicial documents, weighing the public’s presumptive right of access based on the materials’ role in the court’s exercise of judicial power, and balancing that interest against competing considerations. The defendants argued that privacy interests of nonparties, protection of sensitive health information, protection of confidential business information, and the confidentiality associated with arbitration justified their narrowly tailored requests.

Disposition

The provided text does not include a court order or state whether Judge Denise L. Cote granted, denied, or otherwise decided the sealing request. Accordingly, no disposition can be reported from this text.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.