Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Apr. 21, 2023

Boyette v. Montefiore Medical Center

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:22-cv-05280
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Boyette v. Montefiore Medical Center, Judge Koeltl received Montefiore’s request to seal exhibits and redact two statements; the provided text shows no ruling.

Who this affects

Montefiore Medical Center, Fidelity Workplace Services LLC, and members of the public seeking access to the court filings may be affected. The provided text does not state the effect of any ruling because it contains no ruling.

What happened

Boyette v. Montefiore Medical Center concerns Montefiore Medical Center’s April 21, 2023 request to keep two exhibits private in support of its motion to dismiss.

Montefiore asked to seal agreements with Fidelity Workplace Services LLC and to redact two statements in its legal brief. It said the materials contained confidential pricing and service information belonging to Fidelity, a third party.

The letter was addressed to Judge John G. Koeltl. The provided text contains Montefiore’s request and its legal arguments, but no court order or decision on the request.

The detailed version

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

Case
Boyette v. Montefiore Medical Center · No. 1:22-cv-05280
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
Apr. 21, 2023

Filing and request

Montefiore Medical Center submitted a letter motion asking the court for permission to file under seal Exhibits 14 and 15 to a declaration supporting defendants’ motion to dismiss. It also asked to redact two statements in its memorandum of law that drew information from those exhibits.

The exhibits were identified as the Montefiore and Fidelity Recordkeeping and Related Services Agreement for the Montefiore Medical Center 403(b) Plan and a fourth amendment to that agreement between Fidelity Workplace Services LLC and Montefiore Medical Center.

Reasons offered for sealing

Montefiore argued that the documents contained sensitive, commercially competitive information belonging to Fidelity, which it described as a third party to the litigation. According to the letter, the materials included detailed information about pricing and services offered to the Montefiore plan. Montefiore also stated that the information had been treated as confidential, that Fidelity marked the documents confidential, and that the documents were not intended for public disclosure.

The letter described the court’s three-step approach to sealing judicial documents: determining whether the materials are judicial documents, assessing the strength of the public-access presumption, and balancing that presumption against competing interests. Montefiore argued that protecting confidential business and third-party pricing information supported sealing the exhibits and redacting the two statements.

Disposition

The provided text is Montefiore’s request, not a court order. It does not state whether Judge John G. Koeltl granted, denied, or otherwise decided the motion. No disposition can therefore be reported from this text.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.