Ramirez v. The City of New York
- Rearden
- 1:25-cv-02457
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 8
Ramirez v. City of New York: Judge Rearden entered a protective order governing confidential discovery and limiting its use in this case.
Yanick Ramirez, The City of New York, the parties’ lawyers, and other people who receive or handle confidential discovery material in this case, including specified witnesses, experts, vendors, mediators, and court personnel.
What happened
In Yanick Ramirez v. The City of New York, et al., the parties asked the court to set rules protecting certain non-public information exchanged during discovery. They agreed to the order’s terms.
The order allows parties to mark limited materials as confidential, including employment records, investigative records, recordings, medical information, and personal identifying information. Confidential materials generally may be shared only with specified people, such as the parties, lawyers, witnesses, experts, and the court, and may be used only for this case and related appeals.
Judge Jennifer H. Rearden issued the protective order after finding good cause. The order also explains procedures for challenging confidentiality designations, filing materials under seal, handling accidentally disclosed privileged information, returning or destroying confidential materials after the case, and enforcing violations through possible contempt sanctions.
The detailed version
- Ramirez v. The City of New York · No. 1:25-cv-02457
- Rearden
- Sept. 15, 2025
Background
The parties, through counsel, jointly requested a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). They represented that discovery would involve confidential documents or information, and the court found good cause to issue a tailored order for the pretrial phase of the case.
The order does not automatically make every discovery response confidential and does not establish that confidential material may be filed under seal. Protection is limited to information that is legally restricted from disclosure or whose public disclosure could harm business, commercial, financial, or personal interests.
Confidential Materials and Disclosure Limits
The order identifies categories that may be designated confidential, including:
- employment and personnel records of department members; - disciplinary records and records of investigations by specified governmental agencies; - video footage, photographs, audio recordings, and other electronically stored material; - non-public training materials; - documents containing confidential information about non-party inmates; - personally identifying or intimate information; - medical and mental-health records; - records whose disclosure is restricted by statute; and - other documents or information that the parties or court may designate in good faith during the litigation.
People who receive designated confidential material generally may disclose it only to the parties, insurers and their counsel, lawyers and litigation staff, litigation-support vendors, mediators or arbitrators, certain people identified on documents, potential witnesses, experts or other specialized advisers, deposition stenographers, and the court. Several categories of recipients must first receive the order and sign a nondisclosure agreement.
Confidential material may be used only to prosecute or defend this case and any appeals. It may not be used for business, commercial, competitive, or other litigation purposes. The order does not waive objections to discovery, privileges, or protections, and it does not decide whether evidence will be admissible at trial.
Challenges, Sealing, and Privilege
A party may challenge a confidentiality designation or request additional disclosure limits by giving written notice explaining the grounds. If the parties cannot resolve the issue, they must present the dispute to the court under the applicable individual rules.
The order does not create an entitlement to seal documents. A party seeking to file confidential material under seal must first file a letter-motion explaining the basis for sealing and must publicly file a redacted version while filing the unredacted version under seal. The court retains discretion over confidential treatment of material submitted in connection with motions or other proceedings and stated that it is unlikely to seal material introduced as evidence at trial.
If privileged or attorney-work-product material is accidentally disclosed, the disclosure does not waive the protection. The receiving party must return or destroy the material within five business days after a claim of inadvertent disclosure and provide a certification. The producing party must then provide a privilege log, while the receiving party may ask the court to compel production. The producing party retains the burden of proving that the material is privileged or protected.
Duration and Ruling
The protective order remains binding after the litigation ends. Within 30 days after final disposition, recipients must return or, with the producing person’s permission, destroy confidential discovery material and certify that they have not retained copies or other reproductions. Attorneys specifically retained for the case may keep archival copies of specified case materials, but those copies remain subject to the order.
The order states that willful violations could result in punishment for contempt of court and that the court retains jurisdiction to enforce the order or impose contempt sanctions. Judge Jennifer H. Rearden therefore issued the stipulated protective order on September 15, 2025. The order does not decide the underlying claims or defenses in Yanick Ramirez’s case.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.