Abbott Laboratories v. Feinberg
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:18-cv-08468
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Abbott Laboratories v. Feinberg, Judge Schofield granted Abbott permission to file proposed findings under seal with narrow redactions.
Abbott Laboratories may file its proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in redacted form and under seal. The order protects the identities and information concerning the artwork at issue and other artworks.
What happened
Abbott Laboratories asked the court for permission to file its proposed findings of fact and legal conclusions in redacted form and under seal in Abbott Laboratories v. Carol Feinberg.
Abbott said the redactions would protect the identities of several artworks, including the painting involved in the case, because disclosure could harm the artwork’s value. The parties had previously agreed to keep those identities confidential, and the court had allowed similar redactions.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield granted the application. Abbott may file the proposed findings in redacted form and under seal because the court found the proposed redactions narrowly tailored to prevent disclosure of information that could impair the value of the artworks.
The detailed version
- Abbott Laboratories v. Feinberg · No. 1:18-cv-08468
- Lorna Schofield
- Sept. 28, 2020
Background
Abbott Laboratories asked the court for permission to file its September 25, 2020, proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in redacted form and under seal. The request sought to protect the identities of various artworks, including the painting at issue in the case.
Abbott stated that the parties had agreed at the beginning of the case to redact the artist’s identity and the painting’s title and description. Abbott said the purpose was to avoid further clouding the painting’s title and to prevent disclosure that could impair the value of the artwork. The court had previously allowed similar, narrowly tailored redactions in the case.
Ruling
The court granted the application. It allowed Abbott to file its proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in redacted form and under seal. The court stated that it had reviewed the materials and found the proposed redactions narrowly tailored to prevent disclosure of information that could impair the value of the artwork at issue and other artworks.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.