Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 12, 2025

The Travelers Indem. Co., et al. v. Northrup Grumman Corp., et al.

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:12-cv-03040
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
5
Civil ProcedureFirst Amendment
In one sentence

In The Travelers Indem. Co. v. Northrup Grumman Corp., Judge Schofield denied Newsday’s unsealing application but allowed a later intervention motion meeting specified requirements.

Who this affects

Newsday LLC, which may file a motion to intervene seeking unsealing, and the parties whose filings or records are subject to sealing. The order did not itself unseal any records.

What happened

The Travelers Indem. Co. v. Northrup Grumman Corp. is an insurance-coverage dispute involving alleged contamination around facilities, including land and groundwater. Newsday LLC asked the court to unseal filings connected to the parties’ summary-judgment motions, arguing that the public and press have rights of access to those records.

The court denied Newsday’s application. It said Newsday may instead file a motion to intervene for the purpose of seeking unsealing. That motion must identify the records specifically and explain the delay in seeking intervention. The court set November 26, 2025, for the motion and December 12, 2025, for any response.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield issued the ruling. The text does not show that the court decided whether the records must ultimately be unsealed; it addressed only Newsday’s application and the procedure for filing a motion to intervene.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
The Travelers Indem. Co., et al. v. Northrup Grumman Corp., et al. · No. 1:12-cv-03040
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Nov. 12, 2025

Background

The underlying action is described as an insurance-coverage dispute involving Travelers Indemnity Company, Northrup Grumman Corporation, and nominal defendant Century Indemnity Company. The dispute concerns alleged contamination of land and groundwater around Grumman’s facilities, including a plant and community park in Bethpage, New York.

Newsday LLC submitted an application asking the court to unseal filings connected to the parties’ summary-judgment motions. Newsday argued that the filings—including motion briefs, statements of material facts, affidavits, and exhibits—were subject to a strong common-law presumption of public access and a First Amendment right of access. Newsday also argued that the parties’ confidentiality designations and the existing sealing orders did not satisfy the standards for restricting access.

The application materials asserted that numerous filings were sealed or heavily redacted based on designations under a stipulated protective order. The opinion text contains Newsday’s arguments but does not state that the court adopted them or decide the ultimate merits of unsealing the records.

Ruling

The court stated: “Application DENIED.” It nevertheless permitted Newsday LLC to file a motion to intervene in the action for the purpose of seeking to unseal the records at issue. The court required that the motion identify the records sought with specificity and explain the basis for the delay in seeking intervention.

The court set November 26, 2025, as the deadline for Newsday’s motion and December 12, 2025, as the deadline for any response. The ruling therefore denied the application presented in the letter but established a procedural route for Newsday to pursue its unsealing request. It did not, based on the provided text, order any records unsealed or decide the parties’ underlying insurance dispute. Judge Lorna G. Schofield signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.