Eckhart v. Fox News Network, LLC
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:20-cv-05593
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Eckhart v. Fox News, Judge Abrams granted three motions to seal portions of the parties’ summary-judgment filings.
Jennifer Eckhart, Fox News Network, LLC, Ed Henry, third-party women, Fox News employees involved in complaints and investigations, and other non-parties whose information appeared in the filings.
What happened
In Eckhart v. Fox News Network, LLC, the court considered requests by Fox News and Jennifer Eckhart to keep certain portions of summary-judgment filings from public view.
The requested information included details about third-party women, Fox News employees involved in complaints and investigations, non-parties’ personal contact information, and Fox News’s confidential business information.
The court granted all three motions to seal and directed the parties to file redacted public versions when necessary by March 24, 2025. Judge Ronnie Abrams also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate docket entries 418 and 456.
The detailed version
- Eckhart v. Fox News Network, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-05593
- Ronnie Abrams
- Mar. 11, 2025
Background
The court addressed three motions concerning documents filed in connection with summary-judgment proceedings: Fox News Network, LLC’s motion to seal portions of Jennifer Eckhart’s opposition, Eckhart’s motion to seal portions of her opposition, and Fox News’s motion to seal portions of its reply.
In a December 2, 2024 decision, the court had determined that certain categories of information could be sealed under the standard from Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga. Those categories included information about third-party women who claimed they had sexual or romantic relations with Ed Henry; the names and identifying information of Fox News employees involved in complaints and internal investigations; personal contact information of non-parties; and Fox News’s confidential competitive business information. The court had found that privacy interests of third parties and the need to prevent competitive harm outweighed the usual presumption that court records should be publicly accessible.
Ruling
The court stated that each of the three pending sealing requests concerned information within the categories previously approved for sealing. For the reasons given in the December 2, 2024 decision, the court granted all three motions to seal. To the extent necessary, the parties were directed to re-file redacted versions of opposition and reply papers that were under seal on the public docket by March 24, 2025. Judge Ronnie Abrams also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motions pending at docket numbers 418 and 456.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.