Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a distinction between the party moving for sealing and the party who has put the contested documents in its motion papers is irrelevant to the weight of the presumption
• recognizing that the Court must “balance competing considerations against [the presumption of access],” including but not limited to “the privacy interests of those resisting disclosure”
• holding that motive has no effect on the consideration of the weight of the presumption
• concluding that documents submitted in connection with a motion for summary judgment are “judicial documents” in the context of a sealing request
• holding that a motion to seal may be granted when the presumption for public access is overcome by countervailing privacy interests of the parties
• recognizing that a court may seal documents where “closure is essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).