Alves Decastro v. Kavadia

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedFebruary 23, 2024
Docket1:12-cv-01386
StatusUnknown

This text of Alves Decastro v. Kavadia (Alves Decastro v. Kavadia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alves Decastro v. Kavadia, (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : JOSE MARIA ALVES DECASTRO et al., : : Plaintiffs, : 12-CV-1386 (JMF) : -v- : MEMORANDUM OPINION : AND ORDER DEEPAK KAVADIA et al., : : Defendants. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X

JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge:

On February 15, 2024, Defendant Deepak Kavadia submitted a letter requesting that the Court “remove [] posts” about this case from the New York Post’s website and online legal databases such as Justia, eDiscovery Assistant, Casetext, and Leagle. ECF No. 441. Kavadia claims that these posts are “damaging [his] name” and “affecting [his] life and career.” Id. Kavadia’s request is DENIED. To the extent that Kavadia asks the Court to order that public reporting about this case be removed from the Internet, such an order would blatantly violate the First Amendment. To the extent that Kavadia’s request can be construed as a request to seal the record of this case, it is without merit, both because the proverbial cat is well out of the bag and because Kavadia’s embarrassment does not overcome the strong presumption in favor of public access that applies here. See generally Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006); see also, e.g., Bernsten v. O’Reilly, 307 F. Supp. 3d 161, 169 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) (“Generalized concerns of adverse publicity do not outweigh the presumption of access.” (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted)). Accordingly, Kavadia’s request is DENIED. The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this Order to Kavadia at 223 Truman Drive, Cresskill, NJ 07626. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 22, 2024 New York, New York JESSE MAN Uyfited States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga
435 F.3d 110 (Second Circuit, 2006)
Bernsten v. O'Reilly
307 F. Supp. 3d 161 (S.D. Illinois, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Alves Decastro v. Kavadia, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alves-decastro-v-kavadia-nysd-2024.