Farina v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

Background

The plaintiffs are Jason Farina, Charles Gardner, Dorothy Troiano, Deloris Ritchie, and Mirian Rojas, acting on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated. The defendants are the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, New York State Thruway Authority, and Conduent State and Local Solutions, Inc.

The parties submitted a stipulated protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). A protective order is a court order that limits the use and disclosure of information exchanged during discovery. The parties represented that discovery might involve trade secrets, proprietary business information, competitively sensitive information, and nonpublic personal, medical, business, or financial information.

Order

The court approved rules covering documents, electronically stored information, testimony, and other information produced by the parties or third parties. The order creates two confidentiality levels: “Confidential” and “Highly Confidential—Outside Counsel Only.” Confidential material may generally be shared with the parties, their counsel and support personnel, certain witnesses, experts, mediators, court personnel, and other authorized people, subject to the order’s conditions. Highly confidential material is more restricted and generally may be shared only with counsel and specified other recipients, unless all parties consent in writing or the court grants permission.

Protected information may be used only for this lawsuit. People receiving it may be required to sign the confidentiality agreement attached as Exhibit A. The order also establishes procedures for correcting an inadvertent failure to label material, objecting to a confidentiality designation, and resolving disputes over those designations. Depositions are presumptively confidential during the deposition and for 30 days after counsel receives the transcript, after which specific protected portions must be identified.

A party seeking to file protected material with the court must follow the court’s procedures for requesting permission to file under seal. The party that designated the material must justify the sealing request, and the order states that no material may be filed under seal without a further court order addressing the specific material. The order also addresses disclosure at hearings or trial, subpoenas to nonparties, inadvertent disclosure of privileged material, threatened violations, and the return or destruction of confidential information after the litigation and appeals conclude. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the protective order after the case’s final resolution.

Disposition and Significance

Judge P. Kevin Castel entered the stipulated protective order on February 3, 2020. This order concerns discovery management and confidentiality; it does not resolve the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims or the defendants’ defenses. The opinion text does not state any separate ruling on liability, damages, or class certification.