Stern v. Cosby

How courts have described this case

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

• reasoning that the strength of the presumption turns on whether the submissions were made for the court to consider in its ruling on the merits
• noting that “videos can more easily be abused as they can be cut and spliced and used as ‘sound bites’ on the evening news” (internal quotations omitted)
• noting that “videos can more easily be abused as they can be cut and spliced and used as ‘sound bites’ on the evening news” (internal quotations omitted)
• noting that materials generated in discovery become judicial documents when they are relied upon by the court in resolving a discovery dispute such as a motion to compel
• issuing protective order prohibiting parties from “disclos[ing] or releas[ing] any further excerpts from the deposition transcript or video” to media
• sealing deposition transcript and stating “the presumption of public access—if any—that attaches to the transcript [] is low, at best” since the court “would not be making any decision on the merits, but [] simply [] reviewing excerpts of the transcripts to resolve a discovery dispute”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).