Garay v. NYC Health and Hospitals Corporation

Background

The court entered a protective order under Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The order refers to a standing administrative order concerning mediation of certain counseled employment cases and to a requirement that the parties exchange specified documents and information within 30 days after an answer is filed. The parties sought safeguards for the confidentiality of those materials.

Confidentiality rules

A lawyer may designate a document or information as confidential, in whole or in part, if the lawyer determines in good faith that the designation is necessary to protect the client’s interests. Designated materials are to be marked “CONFIDENTIAL.” The order identifies personal identifying numbers, medical records and treatment or diagnosis information, employment history, individual financial information, proprietary or trade-secret information, and information about an individual’s cooperation with the government as categories that are to be treated as confidential and redacted from public filings.

Confidential information may be held and used only for this action. Except for materials requiring an “Attorneys’ or Experts’ Eyes Only” designation, the order generally limits disclosure to the requesting party and counsel, necessary employees of counsel, consultants or experts assisting with the case, and the court or persons with access through the court. Before disclosure, counsel must explain the confidential nature of the materials, explain the limits imposed by the order, and obtain the recipient’s agreement to be bound by the order.

The order also states that failing to designate information as confidential when it is produced does not waive the right to designate it later. At the end of the litigation, confidential information and copies must generally be returned to the producing party or certified as destroyed within 30 days after final judgment is no longer subject to further appeal. Counsel may retain working files if they remain protected.

What the order does not decide

The order does not determine whether the referenced materials are substantively confidential. It also does not itself authorize the parties to file documents under seal; any sealing request remains subject to the court’s rules and the presumption favoring public access to judicial documents.

Disposition

Judge Furman entered the protective order governing the handling and disclosure of designated confidential information. The opinion text supplied here is partially corrupted in the later portion containing the court’s explanatory language and signature, but the readable provisions clearly establish the order’s confidentiality restrictions.