Marcano v. Schindler Elevator Corporation
- 1:23-cv-00201
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
Marcano v. Schindler Elevator Corporation: the court entered a discovery confidentiality order, without deciding whether materials were actually confidential.
Katherine Marcano, Schindler Elevator Corporation, their attorneys, experts, witnesses, and other people who receive discovery materials designated under the order.
What happened
In Marcano v. Schindler Elevator Corporation, Katherine Marcano and Schindler Elevator Corporation agreed to rules protecting certain discovery materials containing claimed confidential business information or privileged communications.
The order limits use and disclosure of designated materials to this lawsuit and specified people, including counsel, experts, the court, and certain witnesses. It also establishes procedures for challenging designations and requires return or destruction of protected materials after the case ends.
The court entered the stipulated order but stated that it had not reviewed the documents or decided whether they were confidential. The court also said the order does not allow the parties to file documents under seal without a prior court order; the judge is not identified in the supplied text.
The detailed version
- Marcano v. Schindler Elevator Corporation · No. 1:23-cv-00201
- Aug. 15, 2023
Background
Katherine Marcano and Schindler Elevator Corporation jointly submitted a stipulated discovery confidentiality order. The order applies to documents, information, and other discovery materials that a producing party designates in good faith as containing confidential business information or privileged communications whose disclosure could be harmful to that party or to people to whom it owes a duty of confidentiality.
Order
The court entered the stipulated order. Materials covered by the order must generally be marked as confidential. They may be used only in connection with this lawsuit and may be disclosed only to specified recipients, including counsel of record and necessary employees, retained experts who sign an acknowledgment, the court and its personnel, and witnesses during depositions who sign the acknowledgment. Those receiving the materials must be told that they may not disclose them further.
The order states that producing protected materials does not waive privilege or other confidentiality rights, and that the order does not decide whether the materials are admissible at trial. A receiving party may ask in writing to remove particular documents from protection. If the parties cannot resolve the request within 45 days after the producing party receives it, the producing party may ask the court to decide the documents' confidential status.
The order also addresses confidential materials used in court filings and at trial. Any filing must comply with the court's rules, and the court may hold proceedings privately upon a showing of good cause. The order does not authorize the parties to file documents under seal without a prior court order.
Within 30 days after the litigation finally ends, protected materials and related copies must generally be returned or destroyed, with written confirmation. The order continues to bind the parties, attorneys, and experts after the litigation ends, and the court retains jurisdiction to enforce it.
Court's Limitation
Judge the court stated that it had not reviewed the documents covered by the stipulation and therefore made no finding that they were confidential. Any such finding would be made later, if necessary, through the order's procedures and subject to the presumption favoring public access to judicial documents. The court entered the order but did not decide the underlying claims or the actual confidential status of any document.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.