Brantley County Development Partners, LLC v. Brantley County, Georgia

• Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
• Decided: January 4, 2023
• Docket: 5:19-cv-00109
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

WAYCROSS DIVISION

BRANTLEY COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ) PARTNERS, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CV 519-109 ) BRANTLEY COUNTY, GEORGIA, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _________

O R D E R _________ Plaintiff moves to file under seal the entirety of a motion and related exhibits that it plans to file at an unspecified future date seeking enforcement of a purported settlement agreement, arguing generally in support of its motion, that sealing is necessary because the documents contain confidential settlement negotiations. (Doc. no. 186.) Plaintiff did not provide the Court with a copy of the motion and exhibits. The public right of access to judicial records is well-established and extends to the inspection and the copying of court records and documents. See Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978). However, this right of access is not absolute. BASF Corp. v. SNF Holding Co., Civil Action No., 4:17-cv-251, 2019 WL 2881594, at *4 (S.D. Ga. July 3, 2019) (citing Globe Newspaper Co v. Superior Court for Norfolk Cty., 457 U.S. 596 (1982)). “When deciding whether to grant a party’s motion to seal, the court is required to balance the historical presumption of access against any significant interests raised by the party seeking to file under seal.” Id. (internal citations omitted). In balancing these interests, courts consider, among other things: whether allowing access would impair court functions or harm legitimate privacy interests, the degree of and likelihood of injury if made public, the reliability of the information, whether there will be an opportunity to respond to the information, whether the information concerns public officials or public concerns, and the availability of a less onerous alternative to sealing the documents. Id. Because the Court cannot make these findings without reviewing the motion and exhibits, the Court DENIES WITH THE RIGHT TO REFILE Plaintiffs motion to file under seal. (Doc. no. 186.) Any refiled motion must attach the motion and exhibits for which sealing is requested in accordance with the procedures set forth in Local Civil Rule 79.7. SO ORDERED this 4th day of January, 2023, at Augusta, Georgia.

BRIAN EK. 2 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA