Haley v. Teachers Investment and Annuity Association
- James Oetken
- 1:17-cv-00855
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Haley v. Teachers Insurance, Judge Lehrburger denied the defendant’s sealing request without prejudice and required more specific information for renewal.
TIAA’s request to restrict public access to portions of the deposition transcript was denied without prejudice; any renewed request must provide the additional details ordered by the court.
What happened
Haley v. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America concerns TIAA’s request to seal portions of a deposition transcript filed in connection with a discovery dispute. TIAA said the transcript contained sensitive business information designated confidential under a protective order.
TIAA argued that public disclosure could cause competitive harm and asked to seal portions of the December 19, 2019, deposition of Carrie Strathmann. It said the requested sealing was limited to internal information about TIAA’s business costs.
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger denied the application to seal without prejudice. He ordered that any renewed application describe the information more specifically, identify the deposition pages and line numbers to be sealed, and state whether the plaintiff opposed the request.
The detailed version
- Haley v. Teachers Investment and Annuity Association · No. 1:17-cv-00855
- James Oetken
- June 4, 2020
Background
TIAA asked permission to file under seal portions of the December 19, 2019, deposition transcript of Carrie Strathmann. The transcript was identified as confidential under the case’s protective order and was submitted as an exhibit to TIAA’s opposition to the plaintiff’s motion to compel and motion to extend fact discovery.
TIAA’s Position
TIAA argued that the transcript contained sensitive business information, including internal information about the cost of running its business. It asserted that public disclosure could cause significant harm to TIAA and asked the court to protect the information from public access and competitors. TIAA also argued that the request was narrowly tailored and would not deprive the public of critical information.
Ruling
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger denied the application to seal without prejudice. This permitted TIAA to submit a renewed application. The court required any renewed application to describe more specifically the information to be sealed, identify the precise deposition portions by page and line number, and state whether the plaintiff opposed the request.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.