Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 2, 2021

MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. v. Airlift Marine Services Pvt Ltd

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:18-cv-10788
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedureEvidence
In one sentence

In MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. v. Airlift Marine Services, Judge Cronan ordered confidentiality protections for the plaintiff’s law-firm invoices.

Who this affects

MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A., Airlift (U.S.A.) Inc., and persons permitted to receive the covered Lyons & Flood invoices.

What happened

In MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. v. Airlift Marine Services Pvt Ltd, the plaintiff and Airlift (U.S.A.) Inc. agreed to protect invoices from Lyons & Flood, LLP that were submitted for use in the case or another proceeding.

The order allows the plaintiff to mark all or part of the invoices confidential. Disclosure is limited to the court, participating lawyers and staff, insurers, the parties, and certain employees and officers assisting with the case. Authorized recipients generally must sign a certification, and the parties must seek return of the materials within 45 days after the case and related proceedings end.

Judge John Peter Cronan approved the stipulation on March 1, 2021. The order preserves attorney-client and work-product protections, allows sanctions for violations, survives the case’s conclusion, and gives the court continuing authority to enforce it.

The detailed version

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

Case
MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. v. Airlift Marine Services Pvt Ltd · No. 1:18-cv-10788
Judge
John Cronan
Date
Mar. 2, 2021

Background

The plaintiff and defendant Airlift (U.S.A.) Inc. submitted a stipulation concerning invoices from Lyons & Flood, LLP. The stipulation applies to those invoices when disclosed for use at trial or in another proceeding.

Confidentiality Terms

The plaintiff may designate all or part of the invoices as confidential in good faith by marking at least the first page. Confidential information may be disclosed only to the court and its staff; counsel, co-counsel, and involved legal and support staff; the parties’ insurers; and the parties and specified directors, officers, and current employees assisting with the proceeding.

Before disclosure, authorized recipients generally must read and agree to the order by signing a certification. Clerical or administrative personnel who do not retain a copy or extract do not have to sign. If confidential information is disclosed improperly, the responsible party must promptly notify the producing party and try to prevent further disclosure. Violations may result in sanctions authorized by statute, rule, or the court’s inherent authority.

The parties preserved all privileges and exemptions, including attorney-client privilege and work-product protection. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 502, an inadvertent disclosure does not waive those protections in this or another federal, state, or foreign proceeding.

Return, Court Filings, and Continuing Authority

Within 45 days after the final conclusion of the case and substantially related proceedings—including settlement or final judgment and completion of appeals—the parties must use their best efforts to collect and return the confidential information to the producing party at that party’s expense. Counsel may retain work product, court filings, transcripts, and exhibits if they remain confidential.

If confidential materials are submitted to the court and are relevant to deciding the dispute, the parties must follow Rule 4 of the court’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases and the requirements identified in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga. The order may be modified by party stipulation or court order, survives the end of the action, and gives the court continuing jurisdiction over disputes concerning improper use of protected information.

Disposition

Judge John Peter Cronan entered the stipulation and order of confidentiality. This was an ancillary confidentiality order; the provided text does not decide the parties’ underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.