Evergreen East Cooperative v. Bottomley Evergreens & Farms, Inc.
- Analisa Torres
- 1:19-cv-05360
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Evergreen East Cooperative v. Bottomley Evergreens, Judge Torres granted Bottomley’s request to redact the settlement amount and ordered public and sealed filings.
Bottomley Evergreens & Farms, Inc., Evergreen East Cooperative, and members of the public seeking access to the court filings.
What happened
In Evergreen East Cooperative v. Bottomley Evergreens & Farms, Inc., Bottomley asked to file its settlement-enforcement motion and related documents publicly while redacting the settlement amount.
Bottomley withdrew its broader request to seal the documents. It said the settlement amount was tied to the amount Evergreen owed for goods, that Evergreen received a significant discount, and that it wanted to protect the privacy of its business deals and pricing.
Judge Analisa Torres granted the request. She directed Bottomley to file the redacted documents on the public docket and the unredacted versions under seal.
The detailed version
- Evergreen East Cooperative v. Bottomley Evergreens & Farms, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-05360
- Analisa Torres
- Dec. 20, 2019
Background
Bottomley Evergreens & Farms, Inc. responded to the court’s December 13, 2019 order concerning Bottomley’s motion to enforce a settlement agreement. Bottomley withdrew its blanket request to seal the documents associated with that motion and instead sought permission to redact only the settlement amount.
The proposed redactions covered Bottomley’s motion, its supporting memorandum, the declaration of Ashlee Webster, and specified exhibits. Bottomley stated that the settlement amount was closely tied to the outstanding amount Evergreen East Cooperative owed for purchased goods, that Evergreen received a significant settlement discount, and that Bottomley wanted to protect the privacy of its business deals and pricing.
Ruling
The court granted Bottomley’s letter-motion to publicly file the motion to enforce the settlement agreement and the associated documents with the settlement amount redacted. The court directed Bottomley to file the redacted documents on the public docket and the unredacted versions under seal. The order did not decide whether the settlement agreement should be enforced.
Effect
The specified documents were to be publicly available in redacted form, while their unredacted versions were to remain under seal. The ruling addressed document filing and access, not the merits of the settlement-enforcement motion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.