“[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case.”
How later courts described this case
- “[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
ALLIANZ GLOBAL INVESTORS GMBBH, et
Plaintiffs, 18 Civ. 10364 (LGS)
-against- □ ORDER
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants. :
LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge:
WHEREAS, on May 14, 2020, Defendant Societe Generale requested leave to file in
redacted form portions of Defendant’s memorandum of law in support of its motion for
reconsideration (Dkt. No. 398). It is hereby
ORDERED that Defendant’s request is GRANTED. The document at Dkt. No. 401
shall remain sealed and accessible only to the parties and counsel identified in the attached
Appendix. Although “[t]he common law right of public access to judicial documents is firmly
rooted in our nation’s history,” this right is not absolute, and courts “must balance competing
considerations against” the presumption of access. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435
F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Nixon v. Warner
Comme’ns., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978) (“[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the
sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and
circumstances of the particular case.”). Filing the above-referenced document in redacted form is
necessary to prevent the unauthorized dissemination of confidential business information.
Dated: June 1, 2020
New York, New York
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE