Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 21, 2024

Amalgamated Bank v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:23-cv-09511
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Amalgamated Bank v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Judge Furman temporarily granted a motion to seal documents while reserving a final decision.

Who this affects

Amalgamated Bank, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Armon Warren, and members of the public seeking access to the court docket and the documents covered by the temporary sealing order.

What happened

Amalgamated Bank asked the court to seal personal information about Armon Warren and confidential materials connected to its request for default judgment. It also asked to file an unredacted version of that motion under seal.

The court temporarily granted the motion to seal. The court said it would decide whether the documents should remain sealed or redacted when it resolves the underlying dispute.

Judge Furman directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF Nos. 50 and 51. The order did not make a final decision about continued sealing.

The detailed version

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

Case
Amalgamated Bank v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. · No. 1:23-cv-09511
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
May 21, 2024

Background

Amalgamated Bank asked the court to seal specific personal identifying information concerning Armon Warren and confidential materials referenced in its motion for default judgment. The requested materials included several exhibits attached to declarations and an affirmation supporting that motion. Amalgamated also asked for permission to file an unredacted version of the default-judgment motion under seal while filing a redacted version publicly.

Amalgamated stated that the requested materials included a settlement agreement and general release involving Amalgamated and a union that was not a party to the dispute. It also said that JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. had designated certain documents as confidential under the case's confidentiality stipulation and protective order, including documents containing Warren's personal information and other exhibits needed for the default-judgment motion.

Ruling

The court granted the motion to seal temporarily. It stated that it would assess whether to keep the documents sealed or redacted when resolving the underlying dispute. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF Nos. 50 and 51. The order therefore did not make a final determination about whether the materials would remain sealed.

The letter accompanying the request cited the presumption that court records are publicly accessible and the need to balance that presumption against the interests supporting secrecy. It also noted that the court had previously granted Amalgamated's request to seal certain documents containing Warren's personal information.

Effect

The requested documents were temporarily kept from public access, subject to the court's later decision. The order concerned the sealing request and did not decide the merits of the underlying default-judgment dispute.

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.