Cooper v. City of New York

Background

The defendants—the City of New York and Police Officer Jessica Rivera—planned to produce documents in discovery under Rules 26 and 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. They stated that some documents could be confidential, private, privileged, or otherwise inappropriate for public disclosure. The parties stipulated to a confidentiality and protective order, and the court entered it.

The stipulation identifies several categories of “Confidential Materials,” including:

- employment and personnel records concerning individual defendants; - disciplinary histories and records from the Civilian Complaint Review Board, the Internal Affairs Bureau, New York City Police Department divisions, or other government agencies; - full names, contact information, and other identifying information of nonparty individuals or witnesses; - nonpublic New York City Police Department training materials; - records concerning the plaintiff’s medical treatment; and - documents produced in connection with the plaintiff’s claim referring to Monell v. Department of Social Services, along with other documents the defendants or the court might designate in good faith during the litigation.

Materials obtained from sources other than the defendants or otherwise publicly available are not confidential under the order. The defendants also reserved the right to designate documents after producing them and to designate qualifying documents produced by nonparties through subpoenas.

Restrictions and Procedures

Confidential Materials may be used only to prepare, settle, or present this action. Before trial, the plaintiff may disclose them only to a party, a retained or specially employed expert, a deposition witness, a court reporter, or the court, subject to the order’s written-consent requirements. Deposition testimony revealing the contents of Confidential Materials may also be designated confidential.

If the plaintiff objects to a confidentiality designation, the plaintiff must object in writing and the parties must try in good faith to resolve the dispute. If they cannot resolve it, the plaintiff must seek judicial intervention within 30 days after receiving the response to the objection. The material remains confidential until the dispute is resolved by agreement or by the court.

Papers filed with the court that incorporate or reveal Confidential Materials must be filed under seal in accordance with the district court’s rules and the assigned judge’s individual practices. If the confidential information is not material to the court filing and the parties agree in writing that redactions are sufficient, the plaintiff may file a redacted document without another court order.

The order provides that an inadvertent disclosure of privileged or otherwise protected information does not waive the applicable privilege, confidentiality, or objection to discovery. Within 30 days after the action ends, including appeals, Confidential Materials generally must be returned or destroyed, subject to the order’s provisions for legally required retention, work product, and materials that cannot reasonably be deleted from databases or review platforms. The confidentiality obligations continue after the litigation ends, and covered materials may not be used for another purpose without prior court approval.

Ruling and Effect

The court entered the parties’ stipulated confidentiality and protective order. It directed the parties to follow its individual practices when filing documents under seal and retained jurisdiction over persons subject to the order as necessary to enforce the obligations or impose sanctions for contempt. The text describes the plaintiff as “pro se,” but the signature section also identifies an attorney for the plaintiff; the opinion text does not resolve that inconsistency.