Baker v. German
- Katherine Failla
- 1:15-cv-07296
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Baker v. German, Judge Failla granted Baker’s request to seal medical records and criminal-history evidence, with the latter sealed pending an evidence ruling.
The plaintiff, whose medical record was permitted to remain under seal and whose criminal-history evidence was ordered sealed pending a ruling on its admissibility at trial.
What happened
In Baker v. German, the plaintiff asked to file under seal parts of a legal brief and exhibits concerning medical records and criminal history. The request cited privacy, sensitivity, and the risk of embarrassment.
The court granted the application. It allowed the plaintiff’s medical record to be filed under seal because of its sensitive personal nature.
Judge Failla also ordered evidence related to the plaintiff’s criminal history to be filed under seal pending resolution of the plaintiff’s motion about whether that evidence may be admitted at trial.
The detailed version
- Baker v. German · No. 1:15-cv-07296
- Katherine Failla
- June 28, 2021
Background
The plaintiff sought permission to file under seal portions of a memorandum supporting a motion to exclude certain evidence about the plaintiff’s medical records, along with exhibits concerning the plaintiff’s medical records and criminal history. The request argued that the medical records contained sensitive personal information and that the criminal-history documents were highly personal, had little bearing on the plaintiff’s excessive-force claims, and could cause embarrassment.
Court’s ruling
The court granted the application. It stated that the plaintiff’s medical record could be filed under seal because of the sensitive personal information it contained. The court also ordered that evidence related to the plaintiff’s criminal history be filed under seal pending resolution of the plaintiff’s motion in limine, which concerns whether that evidence may be admitted at trial.
Effect of the order
The order concerns public access to the identified materials, not the ultimate admissibility of the criminal-history evidence or the merits of the plaintiff’s excessive-force claims. Judge Failla’s order left the criminal-history evidence sealed while the motion about its admissibility remained unresolved.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.