Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 28, 2023

Mercer v. VIACOMCBS/PARAMOUNT

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:22-cv-06322
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Mercer v. ViacomCBS/Paramount, Judge Schofield granted sealing of medical information and limited access to specified people.

Who this affects

The ruling affects Amirah Mercer and ViacomCBS/Paramount, as well as the listed counsel and law-firm personnel who were authorized to access the sealed documents.

What happened

In Mercer v. ViacomCBS/Paramount, Defendant ViacomCBS/Paramount asked the court to accept public filings with personal medical information removed. The defendant also submitted unredacted versions of the documents for filing under seal.

The defendant’s request concerned its memorandum supporting a motion to dismiss and an exhibit containing Plaintiff Amirah Mercer’s medical-contraindication paperwork. Mercer was representing herself.

Judge Schofield granted the application, ordered the unredacted memorandum and exhibit kept under seal, and directed the Clerk to allow access only to the people listed in the defendant’s exhibit.

The detailed version

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

Case
Mercer v. VIACOMCBS/PARAMOUNT · No. 1:22-cv-06322
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
July 28, 2023

Background

Defendant ViacomCBS/Paramount, now known as Paramount Global, asked the court to accept redacted public filings related to its motion to dismiss Plaintiff Amirah Mercer’s complaint. The redacted materials included the defendant’s memorandum of law and an exhibit containing Mercer’s “Medical Contraindication” paperwork. The defendant submitted unredacted versions separately for filing under seal and identified the people who should be allowed to view them. Mercer was representing herself.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that judicial documents generally carry a public-access right, but that right is not absolute. Courts must balance that presumption against competing interests. The court found that medical records carry a strong privacy interest and concluded that the unredacted memorandum and accompanying exhibit should be filed under seal.

Ruling

Judge Lorna G. Schofield granted the application. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motion at Docket Number 47, maintain Docket Numbers 48 and 49 under seal, and allow access to the sealed documents to the people listed in Exhibit A. The order addressed sealing and access to documents; it did not decide the underlying motion to dismiss.

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.