Koonce v. Sazerac Company, Inc.
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:23-cv-04323
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Koonce v. Sazerac, Judge Karas granted Koonce’s request to file specified class-certification materials under seal.
Plaintiff Koonce and Sazerac Company, Inc.; the ruling concerns public access to specified materials filed in the case.
What happened
In Koonce v. Sazerac Company, Inc., Plaintiff Koonce asked to redact and file under seal portions of class-certification briefing, expert reports, an exhibit, and a memorandum supporting a motion to exclude evidence.
Koonce said the materials discussed information Sazerac had designated confidential under a protective order from a related case. That order covered certain financial, business, marketing, ownership, and personal information and required covered court filings to remain sealed until further order.
Judge Kenneth M. Karas granted Koonce’s request. The short order does not provide additional reasoning or identify which particular portions were ultimately sealed.
The detailed version
- Koonce v. Sazerac Company, Inc. · No. 7:23-cv-04323
- Kenneth Karas
- June 15, 2025
Background
Plaintiff Koonce requested permission to redact highlighted portions of, and file under seal, portions of her reply memorandum supporting class certification, Exhibit 37 to a supporting declaration, two reply expert reports, and a memorandum supporting a motion to exclude evidence.
Koonce explained that the materials discussed documents Sazerac Company, Inc. had designated as confidential under a protective order entered in a related action before another judge. The protective order covered previously undisclosed financial information, ownership or control information, business plans, product-development information, marketing plans, personal or intimate information, and other information given confidential status by the court. It required confidential discovery materials and court filings disclosing them to be filed and kept under seal until further order.
Court’s Ruling
The letter stated that the court must balance the public’s interest in access to judicial documents against the privacy interests of the party resisting disclosure. Koonce argued that Sazerac’s confidentiality designations provided good cause for sealing. The court granted the request. The opinion does not separately identify the specific redactions or explain the scope of the sealing order beyond granting the request.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.