Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 23, 2022

Am Re Syndicate, Inc. v. General Insurance Corporation of India

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:22-cv-01028
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
11
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Am Re Syndicate v. General Insurance, Judge Caproni entered a protective order governing confidential discovery materials.

Who this affects

Am Re Syndicate, Inc., General Insurance Corporation of India, their counsel, and other people or entities who receive or handle confidential discovery material, including specified insurers, auditors, service providers, witnesses, experts, mediators, arbitrators, and court personnel.

What happened

Am Re Syndicate, Inc. and General Insurance Corporation of India agreed that the case might require disclosure of private, commercially sensitive, and competitively sensitive information during discovery. They asked the court to issue rules protecting that information.

The order defines confidential information and sets procedures for marking documents and deposition testimony. It limits disclosure to specified people, requires nondisclosure agreements for some recipients, explains how confidential material must be filed with the court, and provides procedures for challenging designations and handling accidentally disclosed privileged information.

Judge Valerie Caproni found good cause and entered the stipulated protective order on June 23, 2022. The order limits use of protected information to this case and related appeals, requires its return or destruction after the case, and continues after the litigation ends.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Am Re Syndicate, Inc. v. General Insurance Corporation of India · No. 1:22-cv-01028
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
June 23, 2022

Background

The parties, through counsel, requested a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). They sought protection for nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that could be disclosed during discovery. The court found good cause for an appropriately tailored confidentiality order governing the pretrial phase of the action.

Terms of the Order

The order defines “Confidential Information” to include designated documents and testimony containing trade secrets, proprietary business information, competitively sensitive information, or personal information that could cause harm or embarrassment if publicly filed. It establishes procedures for designating documents, deposition exhibits, and deposition testimony as confidential, including a 30-day period after a deposition during which the entire transcript must be treated as confidential.

Confidential discovery material may be disclosed only to specified categories of people, including the parties, certain insurers and auditors, litigation counsel and support staff, service providers, mediators or arbitrators, certain witnesses, experts, stenographers, and the court. Several categories of recipients must first receive the order and sign a nondisclosure agreement. Protected information may be used only to prosecute or defend this action and related appeals, not for business, competitive, or unrelated litigation purposes.

The order does not waive objections to discovery, attorney-client privilege, or work-product protection, and it does not decide whether evidence is admissible at trial. Parties challenging a confidentiality designation or seeking additional limits on disclosure must provide written notice and bring unresolved disputes to the court under the judge’s individual practices.

Court Filings and Inadvertent Disclosure

A party filing confidential material must publicly file a redacted version and file the unredacted version under seal. The order states that the court retains discretion over whether to seal material submitted in connection with a motion or proceeding and warns that material introduced at trial is unlikely to remain sealed. A party seeking to file documents under seal must also submit a letter brief and supporting declaration explaining the need for continued sealing.

If privileged or work-product-protected information is inadvertently disclosed, the receiving party must return or destroy it within five business days after notice and provide a certification. The disclosing party must then provide a privilege log within five business days. The receiving party may ask the court to order production, while the disclosing party retains the burden of establishing privilege or protection.

Ruling and Effect

“Pursuant to stipulation,” Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the parties and other persons subject to the order to follow its terms, subject to contempt sanctions for violations. Within 60 days after the final disposition of the action, including appeals, recipients generally must return or, with the producing party’s permission, destroy confidential discovery material and certify that they have not retained copies. Litigation counsel may retain certain archival case materials, which remain subject to the order. The order survives the end of the litigation, and the court retains jurisdiction to enforce it and impose contempt sanctions.

The authoritative version

Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.