Kyle v. Lewis
- Katherine Failla
- 1:20-cv-06142
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Kyle v. Lewis, Judge Failla granted Kyle’s motion to seal Lewis’s filings while his motion to disqualify her counsel remained pending.
The plaintiff, Defendant Lewis, Wigdor LLP, and public access to the specified court filings were affected. The filings were temporarily restricted to access by the court and the parties while the disqualification motion remained pending.
What happened
In Kyle v. Lewis, the plaintiff asked the court to seal filings supporting Defendant Lewis’s motion to disqualify Wigdor LLP as her counsel. She argued that the filings included irrelevant allegations and sensitive personal information.
The court granted the plaintiff’s motion to seal while it considered the disqualification motion. It directed the clerk to make docket entries 14, 15, and 18 visible only to the court and the parties.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla also set deadlines for the plaintiff’s response and Lewis’s reply and scheduled a video motion conference. The order did not decide whether Wigdor LLP should be disqualified.
The detailed version
- Kyle v. Lewis · No. 1:20-cv-06142
- Katherine Failla
- Sept. 29, 2020
Background
Defendant Lewis moved to disqualify Wigdor LLP as the plaintiff’s counsel and filed a supporting memorandum, declaration, and exhibits. The plaintiff moved to seal those filings, arguing that they contained sensitive personal information, irrelevant allegations, and material that could cause harm. Lewis opposed the motion to seal.
Ruling
The court granted the plaintiff’s motion to seal pending resolution of the motion to disqualify. The court cited the character of some of the information and allegations in Lewis’s filings and their irrelevance to the disqualification motion. The clerk was directed to make docket numbers 14, 15, and 18 visible only to the court and the parties.
Next steps ordered
The plaintiff was ordered to respond to the motion to disqualify by October 9, 2020. Lewis’s reply was due by October 16, 2020. The parties were ordered to appear for a video motion conference on October 21, 2020, at noon. Judge Katherine Polk Failla’s order addressed sealing and scheduling; it did not rule on the merits of the motion to disqualify.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.