Vida Longevity Fund, LP v. Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York
- Andrew Carter
- 1:19-cv-06004
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Vida Longevity Fund v. Lincoln Life, Judge Carter ordered filings about class certification and sealing to be clarified and justified.
Vida Longevity Fund, LP and Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York, particularly their submissions and sealing requests related to the pending class-certification motion.
What happened
In Vida Longevity Fund, LP v. Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York, the court addressed materials connected to the plaintiff’s pending request to certify a class. A filing by Lincoln Life included an unredacted copy of the plaintiff’s supporting memorandum.
The court directed Vida Longevity Fund to confirm by January 25, 2022, that the unredacted memorandum was a true and correct copy. The parties also had filed requests to keep documents confidential but had not explained why sealing was justified.
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. ordered both parties to provide specific factual reasons for their sealing requests by February 8, 2022. The order did not decide the class-certification request or the merits of the case.
The detailed version
- Vida Longevity Fund, LP v. Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York · No. 1:19-cv-06004
- Andrew Carter
- Jan. 18, 2022
What the court addressed
The court received a submission from Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York that included an unredacted copy of Vida Longevity Fund, LP’s memorandum supporting its motion for class certification. Class certification is the process by which a court decides whether a case may proceed on behalf of a defined group of similarly situated people or entities.
The court directed Vida Longevity Fund to write to the court by January 25, 2022, confirming that the unredacted memorandum was a true and correct copy of its supporting memorandum.
Sealing requests
The parties had also filed motions to seal documents connected to the pending class-certification motion. The court stated that a party seeking to seal material must make a particular and specific factual showing that disclosure would cause an injury serious enough to justify protection. Because the parties had not provided the required justification, the court ordered each party to provide justification for its sealing motion by February 8, 2022.
Disposition and scope
The order required additional submissions and did not rule on the pending motion for class certification, the sealing motions, or the merits of the underlying dispute. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. entered the order on January 18, 2022.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.