Willis RE Inc. v. Herriott

Background

Defendant Paul Herriott, through counsel, asked the court for permission to file declarations and a memorandum opposing an emergency request by plaintiffs Willis Towers Watson Public Limited Company and Willis Re Inc. to find him in contempt for allegedly violating the court’s temporary restraining order. The declarations would come from two executives of companies connected to the dispute. The opinion states that those executives did not seek confidential treatment of their declarations.

Requested Filing Treatment

Because the plaintiffs had treated the executives’ names and the names of their companies as confidential in their own papers, Herriott requested permission to file public copies of the declarations with those names redacted. His memorandum would refer to the executives as “CEO 1” and “CEO 2” and to the companies as “Client 1” and “Client 2.” He also requested permission to file unredacted copies under seal for the court’s private review.

Herriott’s letter stated that he did not believe the declarations would ultimately qualify for permanent sealing under the presumption of public access to court filings, but requested temporary protection to avoid a possible dispute under the protective order. The letter stated that unredacted copies would be filed publicly if the court denied the request.

Ruling

Judge Jesse M. Furman granted the application on a temporary basis. The court reserved the question of whether the redactions should remain permanently until it decided the underlying motion. The court also stated that the plaintiffs could address the redaction issue in a letter filed with their reply papers. The clerk was directed to terminate ECF No. 71. The order did not decide the underlying contempt request or whether the documents would ultimately remain sealed.