Ashmore v. CGI Inc

Background

Plaintiff Benjamin Ashmore filed a pretrial motion, called a motion in limine, seeking among other things to prevent the introduction of his law school transcript at trial. Defendants asked to file their opposition with portions discussing the transcript redacted and to file the transcript under seal while the Court considered whether Ashmore had properly designated it as restricted to attorneys during discovery. Ashmore argued that the transcript should remain sealed because it was a sensitive personal record similar to a medical record.

Access standard

The Court explained that documents relevant to the judicial process generally carry a presumption of public access. Materials connected to a motion in limine receive a lesser, though still substantial, presumption of access than materials introduced at trial or submitted in support of a motion that could dispose of the case. The Court must identify specific and substantial reasons before allowing such materials to be filed under seal.

Court’s analysis

The Court found substantial reasons to keep the transcript sealed. Law school transcripts are generally not publicly available, and their contents can be sensitive to students. Ashmore represented that portions might embarrass him and might not accurately reflect later developments in his coursework. The Court stated that it did not need to decide whether those representations were true; the possibility of unfair embarrassment was enough for this order.

The Court distinguished another Southern District of New York case involving a law school transcript because that case was criminal and involved allegations that the defendant had falsified parts of the transcript. The Court also noted that public access would be much stronger if Ashmore’s transcript were introduced at trial. If the transcript became relevant to deciding his claims or damages, the Court said Ashmore’s privacy concerns would not overcome the strong presumption of public access at trial.

Disposition

Judge Analisa Torres ordered Defendants, by February 12, 2020, to file their opposition brief in redacted form on the public docket and to file the unredacted brief and Ashmore’s law school transcript under seal. The order addressed filing and access to materials while the Court considered the pretrial motion; it did not decide whether the transcript would ultimately be admitted at trial.