Carey v. New York State Dep't of Health
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:23-cv-03061
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Carey v. New York State Department of Health: Judge Schofield granted Defendants’ motion to seal a non-party employee’s payroll information.
The ruling affects the non-party employee whose identity and financial information appear in the spreadsheet, as well as the parties and counsel identified in the appendix as having access to the sealed document.
What happened
In Carey v. New York State Department of Health, the Defendants asked to seal an exhibit containing a non-party employee’s payroll information.
The spreadsheet included the employee’s identity, hours worked, earnings, and overtime information. The court found that sealing this information was narrowly tailored to protect its confidentiality.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield granted the motion to seal, directed the Clerk to keep Docket No. 178 under seal, and ordered the motion at Docket No. 177 closed.
The detailed version
- Carey v. New York State Dep't of Health · No. 1:23-cv-03061
- Lorna Schofield
- Dec. 3, 2025
Background
Defendants New York State Department of Health and Joshua Vinciguerra sought permission to file an exhibit under seal. The exhibit was an excerpt from a spreadsheet containing 2023 earnings and overtime information for an employee who was not a party to the case. It identified the employee and listed hours worked and gross amounts earned. The appendix to the sealing request identified the parties and attorneys who should have access to the sealed document.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that the public has a common-law right to access judicial documents, but that right is not absolute. Courts must balance public access against competing confidentiality interests. Because other filings referred to the employee’s name, the court found that sealing the spreadsheet was narrowly tailored to preserve the confidentiality of the employee’s financial information.
Ruling
The motion to seal was granted. The Clerk of Court was directed to maintain Docket No. 178 under seal and to close the motion at Docket No. 177.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.