Harte v. Pace University
- Willis
- 1:22-cv-03820
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Harte v. Pace University, Judge Willis denied a transcript-fee waiver and denied without prejudice a request to seal personal information.
Wendy A. Harte, who sought a transcript-fee waiver and limits on public access to personal information.
What happened
In Harte v. Pace University, Wendy A. Harte, who was representing herself, asked the court to waive transcript fees for past in-person hearings and telephone conferences. She also asked the court to limit public access to personal information such as her address and financial information.
The court denied the transcript-fee request because it went beyond the privileges available to people allowed to proceed without paying court fees. The court treated the public-access request as a request to seal documents, but denied it without prejudice because it did not identify specific documents or provide facts supporting sealing them.
Judge Jennifer E. Willis issued the order on July 2, 2025. The Clerk of Court was asked to close the docket entries for both motions.
The detailed version
- Harte v. Pace University · No. 1:22-cv-03820
- Willis
- July 2, 2025
Motions and Rulings
Wendy A. Harte submitted two motions. First, she asked the court to waive any transcript fees associated with all in-person hearings and telephone conferences that had taken place up to that point. The court denied that request, explaining that it went beyond the privileges granted to people allowed to proceed without paying court fees.
Second, Harte asked the court to limit public access to personal information, including her address and financial information. Because Harte was proceeding without a lawyer, the court interpreted this request as a motion to seal. A motion to seal asks the court to restrict public access to specified documents. The court denied the request without prejudice because it did not identify particular documents and did not provide facts supporting sealing under the required three-part review.
Disposition
The court denied the transcript-fee motion and denied without prejudice the motion to seal. It also asked the Clerk of Court to close Docket Nos. 131 and 132.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.