Leonard v. John Hancock Life Insurance Company of New York
- Alvin Hellerstein
- 1:18-cv-04994
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Leonard v. John Hancock, Judge Hellerstein denied the defendants’ motion to keep settlement materials under seal.
The ruling affected the John Hancock defendants’ request to keep specified discovery and settlement materials under seal, as well as public access to those materials.
What happened
Leonard v. John Hancock Life Insurance Company of New York involved the defendants’ request to keep redacted portions of a joint discovery letter and an attached exhibit confidential.
The defendants argued that sealing was needed to protect settlement negotiations and a nonparty’s privacy. They relied on a confidentiality agreement and protective order approved by the court.
Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein denied the motion to seal. He found that no privacy interest was advanced, noted that the settling nonparty did not join the motion, and found the argument that disclosure would hinder settlement speculative.
The detailed version
- Leonard v. John Hancock Life Insurance Company of New York · No. 1:18-cv-04994
- Alvin Hellerstein
- Dec. 5, 2019
Background
The defendants, John Hancock Life Insurance Company of New York and John Hancock Life Insurance Company (U.S.A.), moved to keep confidential and under seal redacted portions of the parties’ November 8, 2019 joint discovery letter and an attached exhibit. The materials were described as confidential settlement material. The motion relied on a court-approved confidentiality agreement and protective order.
Arguments
The defendants argued that sealing was necessary to protect the confidentiality of settlement negotiations and any resulting agreements, and to protect a nonparty’s privacy interests. They also argued that disclosure could hinder the ability to settle.
Ruling
Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein denied the motion to seal. The court stated that no privacy interest was advanced, noted that the settling nonparty did not join the motion, and found that the argument that disclosure would hinder settlement was speculative. The opinion therefore denied the request to maintain the redacted portions of the discovery letter and attached exhibit under seal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.