de Lacour v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.
- Kimba Wood
- 1:16-cv-08364
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In de Lacour v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., Judge Wood granted Defendants’ request to seal or redact materials supporting class decertification.
Colgate-Palmolive Co. and Tom’s of Maine Inc., whose requested sealing and redactions were approved, as well as the plaintiffs and the public’s access to the specified court materials.
What happened
In de Lacour v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., Colgate-Palmolive Co. and Tom’s of Maine Inc. asked to seal or redact exhibits and a memorandum attached to their motion to end class treatment of the case. The plaintiffs did not object.
The court reviewed the proposed redactions under a three-step test governing access to court records. It found that the redactions were narrowly designed to protect confidential sales and financial data and sensitive market and consumer research.
Judge Kimba M. Wood granted the request, finding that the sensitivity of this business information outweighed the public’s usual right of access. The court said it could reconsider the sealing decisions later, after notifying the parties.
The detailed version
- de Lacour v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. · No. 1:16-cv-08364
- Kimba Wood
- Oct. 3, 2022
Background
Colgate-Palmolive Co. and Tom’s of Maine Inc. asked the court to seal or redact various exhibits and a memorandum of law attached to their motion for class decertification. The plaintiffs did not object to the request.
Court’s analysis
The court applied the three-part test from Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga. That test requires the court to determine whether the materials are judicial documents, assess the strength of the common-law presumption that court records should be accessible, and balance competing interests against that presumption.
After reviewing the proposed redactions, the court found that they were narrowly tailored to protect proprietary business information, including confidential sales data, financial data, and competitively sensitive market and consumer research. The court concluded that the sensitivity of this information outweighed the presumption of public access.
Ruling
Judge Kimba M. Wood granted Defendants’ request to seal or redact the specified materials. The court stated that it may reconsider its sealing decisions at any time, with notice to the parties, as to any sealed or redacted portions of either side’s materials.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.