Hernandez v. County of Monterey

Background

The court addressed two administrative motions filed by the plaintiffs concerning two neutral-monitor reports: the 11th Mental Health Report, prepared by Dr. James Vess on March 8, 2024, and the 15th Medical Care Audit Report, prepared by Dr. Bruce Barnett on February 29, 2024.

The plaintiffs’ first motion sought to seal limited portions containing: incarcerated people’s names, dates of birth or death, and booking numbers; the names and email addresses of Wellpath health-care staff directly involved in providing or supervising patient care at the Monterey County Jail; and other personal contact information, including information belonging to the court-appointed neutral monitors.

Legal standard and analysis

The court considered whether the request should be evaluated under the “compelling reasons” standard for materials more than tangentially related to the merits, or the less demanding “good cause” standard. It applied the compelling-reasons standard because the reports addressed the core relief sought in the case, including adequate medical and mental-health care, reasonable accommodations for disabilities, and protection from violence at the jail.

The court relied on its earlier ruling that the neutral-monitor reports should not be sealed in their entirety, while limited redactions were justified to protect personal identifying information and health records. Applying the same reasoning, the court found compelling reasons to redact limited portions of the two reports and concluded that the plaintiffs’ request was narrowly tailored.

The plaintiffs’ second motion stated that the defendants might seek to seal the reports in their entirety. The plaintiffs filed that motion to trigger the defendants’ seven-day deadline to justify complete sealing. The defendants did not respond, and the deadline expired.

Rulings

The court GRANTED the plaintiffs’ Administrative Motion to Seal, ECF 862, as to the limited portions identified in the order’s chart. Those portions included highlighted sections of the 11th Mental Health Report and highlighted sections of the 15th Medical Audit Report and its listed attachments. The court stated that the redactions protected information identifying class members and providers of patient care, as well as information about requirements released from monitoring, and that public disclosure would cause harm.

The court ordered the redacted reports filed in separate public docket entries and ordered chambers copies of the unredacted reports delivered to chambers.

The court DENIED the plaintiffs’ Administrative Motion to Consider Whether to File Under Seal Neutral Monitor Reports, ECF 863. The order terminated ECF 862 and ECF 863. Judge Beth Labson Freeman signed the order on April 8, 2024.