Opinion

King v. City of Columbus

Court
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Filed
Dec 12, 2022
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 28.3%

discussing the justifications for the “strong presumption in favor of openness”

How later courts described this case

  • discussing the justifications for the “strong presumption in favor of openness”
  • “‘[T]he greater the public interest in the litigation’s subject matter, the greater the showing necessary to overcome the presumption of access.’”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

DEARREA KING,

Plaintiff,

Civil Action 2:18-cv-1060

Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr.

v. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth P. Deavers

CITY OF COLUMBUS, OHIO, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court for consideration of Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File

Unredacted Deposition Under Seal, ECF No. 182, and Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File

Unredacted Deposition Under Seal, ECF No. 183. Defendant Bryan Mason seeks leave to file

under seal the unredacted deposition transcripts of Akilah Bulger and Demetrious Braxton,

arguing that they “include[] sensitive information such as discussion of sexual abuse of a minor.”

(ECF Nos. 182-183.) Defendant Bryan Mason also notes that deponent Akilah Bulger was a

minor at the time of her deposition. (ECF No. 182.)

It is well established that “[e]very court has supervisory power over its own records and

files.” Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978). A court’s discretion to seal

records from public inspection, however, is limited by “the presumptive right of the public to

inspect and copy judicial documents and files[,]” which the United States Court of Appeals for

the Sixth Circuit as described as a “long-established legal tradition.” In re Knoxville News-

Sentinel Co., Inc., 723 F.2d 470, 473–74 (6th Cir. 1983); see also Brown & Williamson Tobacco

Corp. v. FTC, 710 F.2d 1165, 1178–80 (6th Cir. 1983) (discussing the justifications for the

“strong presumption in favor of openness”). Therefore, “[o]nly the most compelling reasons can

justify non-disclosure of judicial records.” Shane Grp., Inc. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Mich.,

825 F.3d 299, 305 (6th Cir. 2016) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The Sixth

Circuit has indicated that exceptions fall into two categories: (1) exceptions “based on the need

to keep order and dignity in the courtroom”; and (2) “content-based exemptions,” which “include

certain privacy rights of participants or third parties, trade secrets, and national security.” Brown

& Williamson Tobacco Corp., 710 F.2d at 1179 (citations omitted).

In addition, the Sixth Circuit has recently emphasized the public’s “strong interest in

obtaining the information contained in the Court record.” Shane Grp., Inc., 825 F.3d at 305

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also In re Nat’l Prescription Opiate Litig.,

927 F.3d 919, 939 (6th Cir. 2019) (“‘[T]he greater the public interest in the litigation’s subject

matter, the greater the showing necessary to overcome the presumption of access.’”) (quoting

Shane Grp., Inc., 825 F.3d at 305). Accordingly, district courts must consider “each pleading [to

be] filed under seal or with redactions and to make a specific determination as to the necessity of

nondisclosure in each instance” and must “bear in mind that the party seeking to file under seal

must provide a ‘compelling reason’ to do so and demonstrate that the seal is ‘narrowly tailored to

serve that reason.’” In re Nat’l Prescription Opiate Litig., 927 F.3d at 940 (quoting Shane Grp.,

825 F.3d at 305).

Here, Defendant Bryan Mason moves to file certain redacted deposition transcripts under

seal given the sensitive nature of the deposition testimony, which includes discussions of sexual

abuse of a minor. (ECF Nos. 182-183.) The Court finds that Defendant Mason has set forth

compelling reasons to file under seal the unredacted deposition transcripts of Akilah Bulger and

Demetrious Braxton.

Accordingly, for good cause shown, Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Unredacted

Deposition Under Seal, ECF No. 182, and Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Unredacted

Deposition Under Seal, ECF No. 183, are GRANTED. Defendant Bryan Mason is hereby

GRANTED LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL the unredacted deposition transcripts of Akilah

Bulger and Demetrious Braxton.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: December 12, 2022 /s/ Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers

ELIZABETH A. PRESTON DEAVERS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.