Matthew Stein v. Skatteforvaltningen
- Naomi Buchwald
- 1:23-cv-02508
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Stein v. Skatteforvaltningen, SKAT asked to seal settlement-party names, but the text shows no ruling by Judge Buchwald.
Skatteforvaltningen, Matthew Stein, Jerome Lhote, Luke McGee, and the other covered individuals and entities whose identities SKAT sought to keep confidential.
What happened
In Stein et al. v. Skatteforvaltningen, the dispute concerns a 2019 settlement agreement involving SKAT and Matthew Stein, Jerome Lhote, and Luke McGee. The agreement also covered other individuals and entities whose performance was not at issue in this dispute.
SKAT asked the court to let it file certain declarations and exhibits under seal, or with the names of the other covered parties removed. SKAT relied on the agreement’s confidentiality provision and argued that the identities of nonparty individuals and pension plans should remain confidential.
The provided text is SKAT’s letter requesting permission to seal; it does not include a ruling on that request. Judge Naomi Buchwald is identified as the judge, but the court’s action is unclear from the text provided.
The detailed version
- Matthew Stein v. Skatteforvaltningen · No. 1:23-cv-02508
- Naomi Buchwald
- June 23, 2025
Background
The provided document is a letter from counsel for Skatteforvaltningen, referred to as “SKAT,” to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald. It describes an action arising from a dispute over the parties’ performance under a May 2019 settlement agreement. The agreement required the covered parties collectively to make an initial payment of 950 million Danish Kroner and required Matthew Stein, Jerome Lhote, and Luke McGee to make an additional payment of at least 600 million Danish Kroner by May 2023.
The letter states that the other covered parties had completed their performance and that their performance was not at issue in the case. It also states that, in a May 25, 2023 order, the court directed Stein and Lhote to publicly file the settlement agreement and related materials with the names of the other covered parties redacted.
Requested sealing
SKAT asked for permission to file under seal the Declaration of Marc A. Weinstein, the Statement of Marc Landy, and certain exhibits to the Weinstein Declaration. It specifically requested permission to redact the names of the covered parties other than Stein, Lhote, and McGee.
The letter says that the settlement agreement requires confidentiality “to the fullest extent possible” and requires the parties to use their best efforts to maintain confidentiality. It also says that the agreement allowed SKAT to disclose some terms, including the settlement amount and the number of covered parties, but excluded the identities of those parties from permitted public disclosures.
SKAT argued that the identities of individual covered parties were irrelevant to the dispute and that protecting their confidentiality could help facilitate settlements. It acknowledged that the identities of pension-plan covered parties were relevant to calculating the amount Stein, Lhote, and McGee might owe, but argued that those plans were nonparties whose identities were also subject to the agreement’s confidentiality requirement.
Disposition
The provided text contains a request for sealing, not an order deciding that request. It therefore does not establish whether Judge Buchwald granted, denied, or otherwise resolved SKAT’s motion. The document is dated April 7, 2025, while the supplied case metadata lists June 23, 2025, as the filing date.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.