Accent Delight International Ltd. v. Sotheby's

Background

The filing asks the court to reconsider its March 3, 2022 order denying plaintiffs’ requests to seal or redact filings. The requests concerned materials filed in connection with plaintiffs’ opposition to Sotheby’s motions to exclude. The court’s order states that Sotheby’s application was granted temporarily and that the March 3 order was vacated.

Requested sealing and redactions

Sotheby’s sought to redact references to a specific Sotheby’s client because the court had previously allowed the same information to be redacted from Sotheby’s motions to exclude.

Sotheby’s also asked to keep or maintain redactions to several exhibits:

- Exhibit A to the Kornstein Declaration, which Sotheby’s said contained information about a private transaction involving a Gurr Johns client and information about the company’s income. Sotheby’s argued that disclosure could cause competitive harm to Gurr Johns, a third party. - Exhibit H to the Kornstein Declaration, which Sotheby’s described as an internal, confidential Sotheby’s policy concerning formal valuations issued by Sotheby’s UK. Sotheby’s argued that the policy was not a judicial document and was not relevant to the court’s decision on plaintiffs’ motion to exclude. - Exhibits F and G to the Kornstein Declaration, which Sotheby’s said contained proprietary and competitively sensitive information about private offers from clients for identified artworks. Sotheby’s argued that the amounts of those offers were not relevant to plaintiffs’ arguments about artwork valuation.

Court’s action

The court noted that Sotheby’s had not complied with Section 7(C)(i) of the court’s individual rules. That provision requires a party seeking to file material under seal or in redacted form because an opposing party or third party requested it to notify that party or third party that it must submit a letter explaining the need for sealing or redaction within three days. The court stated that plaintiffs had expressly noted this deadline in their February 18, 2022 letter-motion.

Despite the noncompliance, the court temporarily granted Sotheby’s application and vacated the March 3, 2022 order. It directed the Clerk of Court to restrict access to specified electronic docket filings to court users and the parties. The court will decide whether to keep the materials sealed or redacted when it decides the underlying motion. The order does not state a final ruling on whether the materials will remain sealed or redacted.