Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 12, 2022

de Lacour v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.

Judge
Kimba Wood
Docket
1:16-cv-08364
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureSummary Judgment
In one sentence

In de Lacour v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., Judge Wood granted plaintiffs’ unopposed request to file specified materials under seal to protect proprietary information.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs may file the specified materials with redactions publicly and file the corresponding materials under seal; the order protects proprietary business information designated as confidential by Colgate-Palmolive Company and Tom’s of Maine, Inc. and limits public access to the redacted material.

What happened

In de Lacour v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., plaintiffs Anne de Lacour, Andrea Wright, and Loree Moran asked to file portions of their court papers and exhibits under seal or with redactions. The materials concerned their opposition to defendants’ summary-judgment motions and a motion involving plaintiffs’ experts.

The plaintiffs said the materials contained business information that Colgate-Palmolive Company and Tom’s of Maine, Inc. had designated as confidential. They also said the defendants did not object. The plaintiffs proposed publicly filing redacted versions and filing unredacted versions under seal.

The court granted the request. After reviewing the proposed redactions, Judge Kimba M. Wood found that they were narrowly tailored to protect proprietary business information and that the information’s sensitivity outweighed the public’s presumptive right of access. The court said it could reconsider the sealing decisions later after notifying the parties.

The detailed version

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

Case
de Lacour v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. · No. 1:16-cv-08364
Judge
Kimba Wood
Date
Dec. 12, 2022

Request

Plaintiffs Anne de Lacour, Andrea Wright, and Loree Moran asked to file under seal portions of their memoranda opposing summary-judgment motions by Tom’s of Maine, Inc. and Colgate-Palmolive Company, their responses to the defendants’ statements of material facts, specified exhibits, and a memorandum opposing the defendants’ motion to exclude reports and testimony from plaintiffs’ experts J. Michael Dennis and Colin B. Weir.

Reason for Request

The plaintiffs stated that the documents and exhibits contained proprietary information that Colgate-Palmolive Company and Tom’s of Maine, Inc. had designated as confidential. They also stated that the defendants did not object. The plaintiffs proposed filing public versions with redactions and filing copies containing the redacted material under seal.

Ruling

The court granted the plaintiffs’ request. After reviewing the proposed redactions, the court found that they were narrowly tailored to protect proprietary business information. The court determined that the information’s sensitivity outweighed the presumption of public access, relying on the access standard discussed in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga. The court stated that it could reconsider the sealing determinations at any time, with notice to the parties, concerning any sealed or redacted portions of the plaintiffs’ materials.

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.