Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

BG v. Banks

United States District Court, N.D. Mississippi, Greenville Division

December 29, 2016

BG, III, a minor, by and through his next friend and special guardian, Marion E. Grantham, Jr. PLAINTIFF
v.
ROB BANKS, BRAD CARVER, JERRY CARVER, LEE TAYLOR, and CARROLL COUNTY DEFENDANTS

          ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL

          Debra M. Brown, United States District Judge

         On December 21, 2016, the defendants filed a “Motion Seeking Authorization to File Summary Judgment Exhibits Under Seal for Limited Review by Court and Counsel.” Doc. #48. The defendants seek to seal seven exhibits, Exhibits A-G, identified in their motion as six affidavits and a document entitled “YOUTH COURT FILE.” Id.

         I Applicable Law

         Rule 79 of the Uniform Local Rules provides that no document may be filed under seal without a court order. L.U. Civ. R. 79(b). In this regard, Rule 79 instructs that “[n]o document may be sealed merely by stipulation of the parties. A confidentiality order or protective order entered by the court to govern discovery will not qualify as an order to seal documents for purposes of this rule.” Id. at 79(d).

         In addition to these substantive requirements, Rule 79 sets forth the following procedural requirements for motions to file under seal:

         Any motion to seal must be accompanied by a non-confidential supporting memorandum, a notice that identifies the motion as a sealing motion, and a proposed order. A party may also submit a confidential memorandum for in camera review. The non-confidential memorandum and the proposed order must include: (A) A non-confidential description of what is to be sealed;

(B) A specific request that the document or case:
(1) Be sealed from any access by the public and the litigants' counsel;
(2) Be sealed from public access only, with CM/ECF access permitted to the litigants' counsel; or
(3) Be sealed only from public access in CM/ECF, but available for public viewing at one or more terminals located within the Clerk's office.
(C) A statement of why sealing is necessary, why the specific character of sealing set forth in subparts (1)-(3) above is most appropriate, and why another procedure will not suffice;
(D) References to governing case law; and
(E) Unless permanent sealing is sought, a statement of the period of time the party seeks to have the matter maintained under seal and how the matter is to be handled upon unsealing.
(F) The proposed order must recite the findings required by governing case law to support the proposed sealing. Any confidential memoranda will be treated as sealed pending ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.