New York City Transit Authority v. Express Scripts, Inc.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:19-cv-05196
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In New York City Transit Authority v. Express Scripts, Judge Furman temporarily granted NYCTA’s sealing request and directed termination of ECF No. 131.
The temporary ruling affects the New York City Transit Authority, Express Scripts, and the individuals whose names NYCTA sought to protect in the redacted exhibit.
What happened
New York City Transit Authority v. Express Scripts, Inc. concerns corrected filings submitted by the New York City Transit Authority in opposition to Express Scripts’ summary-judgment motions and its request to exclude NYCTA’s expert.
NYCTA asked to file one previously omitted exhibit with redactions protecting the names of individuals connected to an anonymous fraud tip. NYCTA said Express Scripts did not object to the corrected filings or the redaction request.
Judge Furman temporarily granted the motion to seal. He said the court would decide whether the materials should remain sealed or redacted when ruling on the underlying motion, and directed the Clerk to terminate ECF No. 131.
The detailed version
- New York City Transit Authority v. Express Scripts, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-05196
- Jesse Furman
- May 17, 2021
Background
The New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) submitted corrected versions of a declaration and its response to Express Scripts’ statement of material facts and counterstatement. NYCTA said the corrections fixed citation errors and added two exhibits that had been referenced but inadvertently omitted. NYCTA stated that the corrections made no substantive changes and that Express Scripts had no objection.
Request for Redaction
NYCTA also asked for permission to file one omitted exhibit with redactions protecting the names of certain individuals implicated in an anonymous fraud tip. The letter cited the privacy interests of third parties and noted that the court had provisionally granted a similar request by Express Scripts.
Ruling
The court temporarily granted the motion to seal. It reserved the question whether the materials should remain sealed or redacted until it decides the underlying motion. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF No. 131. This order did not decide the parties’ underlying summary-judgment motions or the request to exclude NYCTA’s expert.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.