Castle Senior Living Inc. v. City of Delafield

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin
DecidedNovember 17, 2022
Docket2:21-cv-01040
StatusUnknown

This text of Castle Senior Living Inc. v. City of Delafield (Castle Senior Living Inc. v. City of Delafield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Wisconsin primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Castle Senior Living Inc. v. City of Delafield, (E.D. Wis. 2022).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

CASTLE SENIOR LIVING, INC.,

Plaintiff, Case No. 21-cv-1040 v.

CITY OF DELAFIELD, Defendant.

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Based on the Stipulation of the parties and the factual representations set forth therein, the Court finds that the exchange of sensitive information between or among the parties and/or third parties other than in accordance with this Order may cause unnecessary damage and injury to the parties or to others. The Court further finds that the terms of this Order are fair and just and that good cause has been shown for entry of a protective order governing the confidentiality of documents produced in discovery, answers to interrogatories, answers to requests for admission, and deposition testimony;

provided, however that this Order applies to discovery, and not to information filed with the Court, unless a party moves for a protective order and establishes a good-faith basis to seal specific information from the public record under the standards set forth in this Circuit for sealing such information. See, e.g., Hicklin Eng’g, L.C. v. Bartell, 439 F.3d 346, 348-49 (7th Cir. 2006).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and Civil L.R. 26(e): (A) DESIGNATION OF CONFIDENTIAL OR ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY

INFORMATION. Designation of information under this Order must be made by placing or affixing on the document or material, in a manner that will not interfere with its legibility, the words “CONFIDENTIAL” or “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.”

(1) One who produces information, documents, or other material may designate them as “CONFIDENTIAL” when the person in good faith believes they contain trade secrets or nonpublic confidential technical, commercial, financial, personal, or business information.

(2) One who produces information, documents, or other material may designate them as “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” when the person in good faith believes that they contain particularly sensitive trade secrets or other nonpublic

confidential technical, commercial, financial, personal, or business information that requires protection beyond that afforded by a CONFIDENTIAL designation. (3) Except for information, documents, or other materials produced for inspection at the party’s facilities, the designation of confidential information as

CONFIDENTIAL or ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY must be made prior to, or contemporaneously with, their production or disclosure. In the event that information, documents or other materials are produced for inspection at the

party’s facilities, such information, documents, or other materials may be produced for inspection before being marked confidential. Once specific information, documents, or other materials have been designated for copying, any

information, documents, or other materials containing confidential information will then be marked confidential after copying but before delivery to the party who inspected and designated them. There will be no waiver of confidentiality by

the inspection of confidential information, documents, or other materials before they are copied and marked confidential pursuant to this procedure. (4) Portions of depositions of a party’s present and former officers, directors, employees, agents, experts, and representatives will be deemed

confidential only if designated as such when the deposition is taken or within 30 days of receipt of the deposition transcript. (5) If a party inadvertently produces information, documents, or other

material containing CONFIDENTIAL or ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY information without marking or labeling it as such, the information, documents, or other material shall not lose its protected status through such production and the parties shall take all steps reasonably required to assure its continued confidentiality if

the producing party provides written notice to the receiving party within 10 days of the discovery of the inadvertent production, identifying the information, document or other material in question and of the corrected confidential

designation. (B) DISCLOSURE AND USE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. Information, documents, or other material designated as CONFIDENTIAL or

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY under this Order must not be used or disclosed by the parties or counsel for the parties or any persons identified in subparagraphs (B)(1) and (2) below for any purposes whatsoever other than preparing for and conducting the litigation in

which the information, documents, or other material were disclosed (including appeals). Nothing in this Order prohibits a receiving party that is a government agency from following its routine uses and sharing such information, documents or other material with other government agencies or self-regulatory organizations as allowed by law.

(1) CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. The parties and counsel for the parties must not disclose or permit the disclosure of any information, documents or other material designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” by any other party or third party under this Order, except that disclosures may be made in the following

circumstances: (a) Disclosure may be made to counsel for the parties, employees and independent contractors of counsel, or, when the party is a government

entity, employees and independent contractors of the government entity, who have direct functional responsibility for the preparation and trial of the lawsuit. Any such employee or independent contractor to whom counsel

for the parties makes a disclosure must be advised of, and become subject to, the provisions of this Order requiring that the information, documents, or other material be held in confidence.

(b) Disclosure may be made only to employees of a party required in good faith to provide assistance in the conduct of the litigation in which the information was disclosed.

(c) Disclosure may be made to court reporters engaged for depositions and those persons, if any, specifically engaged for the limited purpose of making and handling copies of documents or other material. Before disclosure to any such court reporter or person engaged in making

copies, such reporter or person must agree to be bound by the terms of this Order. (d) Disclosure may be made to consultants, investigators, or

experts (collectively “experts”) employed by the parties or counsel for the parties to assist in the preparation and trial of the lawsuit. Before disclosure to any expert, the expert must be informed of and agree to be subject to the provisions of this Order requiring that the information, documents, or other

material be held in confidence. (e) Disclosure may be made to deposition and trial witnesses in connection with their testimony in the lawsuit and may be made to the Court

and the Court’s staff. (f) Disclosure may be made to persons already in lawful and legitimate possession of such CONFIDENTIAL information.

(g) The list of persons to whom CONFIDENTIAL information may be disclosed identified in this Paragraph (B)(1) may be expanded or modified by mutual agreement in writing by counsel for the parties to this

action without the necessity of modifying this Stipulation and Protective Order. (2) ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY INFORMATION. The parties and counsel for the parties must not disclose or permit the disclosure of any

information, documents, or other material designated as “ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” by any other party or third party under this Order to any other person or entity, except that disclosures may be made in the following circumstances:

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Castle Senior Living Inc. v. City of Delafield, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/castle-senior-living-inc-v-city-of-delafield-wied-2022.