Day v. GEICO Casualty Company
- Beth Freeman
- 5:21-cv-02103
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Day v. GEICO Casualty Company, Judge Freeman denied one sealing motion without prejudice and granted defendants’ motion to seal confidential financial information.
Jessica Day, GEICO Casualty Company, and the other defendants; the order also affects public access to the specified court filings.
What happened
In Day v. GEICO Casualty Company, the court considered two requests to keep documents relating to a request to change the class definition from public view.
The court denied Jessica Day’s request without prejudice because GEICO had not filed the required statement or declaration supporting confidentiality. It granted defendants’ request to seal portions of their response and supporting documents containing GEICO’s internal financial results and sensitive business information.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman ordered defendants to file the required statement or declaration within 10 days. If they do not, Day must file unredacted versions of the documents on the public docket.
The detailed version
- Day v. GEICO Casualty Company · No. 5:21-cv-02103
- Beth Freeman
- Aug. 30, 2023
Background
The court ruled on two administrative motions concerning documents connected to Plaintiff Jessica Day’s motion to modify the class definition. Day asked the court to consider whether material designated confidential by defendants should be filed under seal. Defendants separately asked to file portions of their response and supporting exhibits under seal.
Legal standard
The court explained that judicial records are generally available to the public. Because the documents related more than tangentially to the merits of the case, the requests were subject to the “compelling reasons” standard. Under that standard, the party seeking sealing must show a sufficient reason for secrecy, explain the harm that would result from disclosure, and show that sealing is narrowly tailored. When a party seeks to seal another party’s confidential material, the party that designated the material confidential must file a supporting statement or declaration under Civil Local Rule 79-5(f)(3).
Day’s motion
Day’s motion identified highlighted portions of her motion to modify the class definition and supporting declarations as containing information defendants had designated confidential. Defendants had not filed the required statement or declaration by the date of the order. The court therefore denied Day’s administrative motion without prejudice, including as to highlighted portions of her motion and two declarations and the entirety of another declaration. Defendants were allowed 10 days to file the required statement or declaration.
Defendants’ motion
Defendants sought to seal highlighted portions of their response, a supporting declaration, deposition excerpts, and GEICO’s profit-and-loss statement. The court found that the materials contained nonpublic financial information concerning GEICO’s operations in California and that disclosure threatened GEICO’s competitive interests. It also found that the request was narrowly limited to material that could properly be sealed. The court granted defendants’ administrative motion to file those portions under seal.
Order
Judge Beth Labson Freeman ordered that Day’s motion be denied without prejudice and that defendants’ motion be granted. If defendants do not file the required statement or declaration within 10 days, Day must file unredacted versions of the documents sought to be sealed on the public docket.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.