Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 28, 2022

Cunningham v. Agro

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:15-cv-01266
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureCivil Rights
In one sentence

In Cunningham v. Agro, Judge Carter granted retroactively a motion to seal documents concerning Cunningham’s medical records.

Who this affects

Emir Cunningham and Rose Agro, regarding access to documents concerning Cunningham’s medical treatment.

What happened

Cunningham v. Agro concerns Emir Cunningham’s request to file certain documents under seal in a lawsuit involving alleged constitutional violations during his incarceration at a New York City Department of Correction facility.

Cunningham asked to seal portions of his opposition to Rose Agro’s summary-judgment motion and related exhibits because they contained detailed medical records. Agro’s counsel consented to the request.

Judge Andrew L. Carter granted the motion to seal retroactively, using the court’s term “nunc pro tunc.” The order addressed sealing only and did not decide the underlying claims or summary-judgment motion.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cunningham v. Agro · No. 1:15-cv-01266
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Sept. 28, 2022

Background

Emir Cunningham asserted claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that his constitutional rights were violated while he was incarcerated at the Anna M. Kross Center, a New York City Department of Correction facility. The opinion identifies Rose Agro as the facility’s former warden during the relevant period. Cunningham’s claims included an allegation that he failed to receive critical medical treatment.

Sealing request

Cunningham’s counsel asked for permission to file under seal portions of Cunningham’s opposition to Agro’s motion for summary judgment and related exhibits concerning his medical treatment. The request cited the sensitive nature of detailed medical records and stated that Agro’s counsel consented. The letter also stated that Agro had made a similar sealing request earlier in the case.

Ruling

The court stated that it had received the parties’ requests to seal documents and that it was confirming that the documents would remain sealed. Judge Andrew L. Carter granted the motion to seal “nunc pro tunc,” meaning retroactively. The opinion does not decide the underlying constitutional claims or the summary-judgment motion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.