Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 19, 2020

Fox v. Starbucks Corporation

Judge
Alison Nathan
Docket
1:19-cv-04650
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Fox v. Starbucks Corporation, Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn allowed plaintiffs to file two motion-to-compel exhibits under seal.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs may file Exhibits 1 and 2 supporting their motion to compel under seal, limiting public access to those exhibits.

What happened

In Fox v. Starbucks Corporation, the plaintiffs asked to file two exhibits supporting their motion to compel under seal.

The court found good cause to keep the exhibits from public view and allowed the plaintiffs to file Exhibits 1 and 2 under seal.

Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn issued the order on March 19, 2020, after a telephone hearing.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Fox v. Starbucks Corporation · No. 1:19-cv-04650
Judge
Alison Nathan
Date
Mar. 19, 2020

Background

On March 8, 2020, the plaintiffs asked for permission to file two exhibits supporting their motion to compel under seal. Filing under seal restricts public access to the filed documents.

Ruling

The court found good cause to permit the exhibits to be filed under seal. It therefore allowed the plaintiffs to file Exhibits 1 and 2 to the motion to compel under seal. The order cited a Second Circuit decision recognizing that district courts have considerable discretion when initially deciding whether documents should be sealed.

Judge

Sarah Netburn, United States Magistrate Judge, issued the order after a March 19, 2020 telephone hearing.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.