Moore v. Louaillier

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “courts in this district have repeatedly found that the preservation of such bargained-for confidentiality does not overcome the presumption of access to judicial documents” and collecting cases
• noting that courts should err on the side of non-disclosure of unverified information
• “Pleadings are judicial documents for purposes of common-law and First Amendment rights of access’
• lifting seal and emphasizing that “[a] possibility of future adverse impact on employment . . . is not a higher value sufficient to overcome the presumption of access to judicial documents” (internal quotations omitted)
• ordering unsealing of preliminary injunction motion papers, pleadings and court decisions
• “[C]ourts in this district have repeatedly found that the preservation of such bargained-for confidentiality does not overcome the presumption of access to judicial documents.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).