Global Association of Risk Professionals v. Global Institute of Financial…
Global Association of Risk Professionals, Inc. v. Global Institute of Financial Professionals
- P. Castel
- 1:21-cv-05207
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Global Association v. Global Institute, Judge Castel denied an application concerning sanctions over Jay Hines’s deposition nonappearance.
Defendant Global Institute of Financial Professionals and nonparty Jay Hines, whose requested sealing and sanctions relief was denied; the ruling also concerned Plaintiff Global Association of Risk Professionals, Inc.’s filing.
What happened
In Global Association of Risk Professionals, Inc. v. Global Institute of Financial Professionals, the defendant asked the court to seal a filing that disclosed nonparty Jay Hines’s medical condition and to sanction the plaintiff. The filing concerned the plaintiff’s effort to enforce a subpoena to Hines in related litigation.
The defendant argued that the medical information was private and had been disclosed publicly without justification. It asked the court to require removal of the filing from public docket services and to restrict similar disclosures in the related litigation.
Judge P. Kevin Castel denied the application. The court stated that Hines’s reasons for not appearing at his deposition were central to the matter and that the information was not a gratuitous insertion of unrelated material.
The detailed version
- Global Association of Risk Professionals v. Global Institute of Financial… · No. 1:21-cv-05207
- P. Castel
- Apr. 4, 2022
Background
The defendant submitted an emergency application concerning a letter the plaintiff had filed on the public docket. According to the defendant’s submission, the letter related to a motion in the Eastern District of Virginia seeking to enforce a subpoena issued to the defendant’s trademark-prosecution counsel and nonparty, Mr. Jay Hines. The defendant asserted that the letter disclosed Hines’s confidential medical condition.
Requested relief
The defendant asked the court to seal the letter, require the plaintiff to contact third-party docket services to remove the letter from their databases, and direct the plaintiff to seal any filings in the Virginia litigation that referred to Hines’s condition. The defendant also requested sanctions against the plaintiff for publicly disclosing the medical information.
Ruling
The court denied the application. The court stated that the plaintiff was seeking sanctions for Hines’s nonappearance at his deposition in a motion filed in the Virginia litigation, and that Hines’s several reasons for not appearing were central to the matter. The court therefore characterized the disclosure as far from a gratuitous insertion of collateral material. The order does not state separate dispositions for each form of relief requested or decide the underlying dispute between the parties.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.