Brown v. Building Engines, Inc.
- P. Castel
- 1:23-cv-06684
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Brown v. Building Engines, Judge Castel received Building Engines’ request to file two confidential exhibits under seal.
Building Engines, Michael Brown, Jones Lang LaSalle, Inc., and the public’s access to the two proposed sealed exhibits.
What happened
Brown v. Building Engines, Inc. is a letter from Building Engines asking the court to let it file two exhibits to its motion to dismiss under seal. The exhibits are a merger agreement and Brown’s employment agreement.
Building Engines said the documents contain confidential commercial information, including negotiated merger terms and compensation and benefits information. It argued that disclosure could cause competitive harm to Brown, Building Engines, and Building Engines’ parent company, Jones Lang LaSalle, Inc. Brown did not oppose the request.
The provided text does not show a ruling on the sealing request. Judge Castel is identified as the judge, but the text only contains Building Engines’ request, not an order granting or denying it.
The detailed version
- Brown v. Building Engines, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-06684
- P. Castel
- Nov. 21, 2023
Document and request
The provided document is a November 17, 2023 letter from Building Engines’ counsel to Judge P. Kevin Castel. Building Engines asks for permission to file two exhibits to its motion to dismiss Brown’s First Amended Complaint under seal, meaning the exhibits would not be publicly accessible in the ordinary court record.
Documents at issue
Building Engines identifies Exhibit A as an Agreement and Plan of Merger involving Building Engines, Emergent Hudson Merger Sub, Inc., Emergent Properties Inc., doing business as LogCheck, and Michael Brown. It identifies Exhibit B as Brown’s confidential employment agreement with Building Engines. The letter states that Brown consented to sealing both exhibits.
Arguments in the letter
Building Engines argues that the merger agreement contains nonpublic negotiated terms and that the employment agreement contains nonpublic compensation and benefits information. It asserts that disclosure would likely cause future competitive harm to Brown, Building Engines, and Building Engines’ parent company, Jones Lang LaSalle, Inc. The letter also argues that the public would receive no benefit from disclosure and that the claimed competitive harm outweighs the public’s interest in access to the documents. It cites decisions discussing the public-access presumption for court documents and protection of sensitive commercial information.
Ruling shown by the provided text
The provided text does not include a court order or state whether Judge Castel granted or denied the request. It therefore does not establish the disposition of the sealing motion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.