Beter v. Baughman
- Gregory Woods
- 1:24-cv-00079
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 10
In Beter v. Baughman, Magistrate Judge Tarnofsky granted Beter’s request to seal discovery materials, limiting access to case participants and court staff.
Petra Beter and Duane Baughman are affected as parties to the case. The sealed materials will be accessible to case participants and court staff rather than the general public.
What happened
Beter v. Baughman is an Adult Survivors Act case in which Petra Beter asked to file certain discovery materials under seal while seeking additional discovery from Duane Baughman and permission to serve a witness by alternative methods. The materials included deposition excerpts, a statement produced in discovery, and Baughman’s written discovery responses.
The order addressed only the request to seal those materials. It did not decide Beter’s requests to compel additional discovery or to serve Melinda Cardwell by telephone, text message, or email. The court said discovery materials generally have a low presumption of public access during the discovery phase.
Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky granted Beter’s application to file the materials under seal and directed the Clerk to terminate the related filing and seal the referenced documents, allowing access to case participants and court staff.
The detailed version
- Beter v. Baughman · No. 1:24-cv-00079
- Gregory Woods
- June 26, 2025
Background
Petra Beter brought this action under the Adult Survivors Act, alleging that Duane Baughman sexually assaulted her. In a letter-motion, Beter asked to file certain discovery materials under seal while pursuing two other requests: an order requiring Baughman to supplement his discovery responses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, and permission to serve third-party witness Melinda Cardwell by alternative means under Rule 45.
The materials Beter sought to seal included excerpts from depositions, a statement by Ashley Thompson produced in discovery, and Baughman’s written discovery responses. At least one party had designated the materials as confidential under the case’s confidentiality agreement and protective order.
Court’s ruling
The court granted Beter’s application to file the discovery materials under seal. It reasoned that documents exchanged during discovery often do not assist the court in performing its constitutional decision-making functions, so the public’s presumptive right of access to them is low during the discovery phase.
The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF 212 and seal the referenced documents, with access for case participants and court staff. The order did not rule on whether Baughman must supplement his discovery responses or whether Beter may serve Cardwell by telephone, text message, or email; those requests appeared in the supporting letter but were not decided in this order.
Read the full 10-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.