Days v. Police Department

Opinion

USDC SDNY DOCUMENT \ \ Jestche ster ELECTRONICALLY FILED County DATE FILED: 09/09/2024 George Latimer County Executive John M. Nonna County Attorney September 5, 2024 VIAECF Hon. Nelson S. Roman U.S. District Judge, $.D.N.Y. Brieant Federal Courthouse, Courtroom 218 300 Quarropas Street White Plains, New York 10601-4150 Re: — Sehvyn Days v. County of Westchester, et al, 18-cv-11538 (NSR) (AEK) Dear Judge Roman: The County of Westchester and Christopher Calabrese (hereinafter, “Defendants”) write to request that certain exhibits pertaining to Defendants’ summary judgment motion be filed under seal. Although “[t]he common law right of public access to judicial documents is firmly rooted in our nation’s history,” this right is not absolute, and courts “must balance competing considerations against” the presumption of access. Lagosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Nixon v. Warner Comme’ns, Inc, 435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978) (“[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case.”). ‘The Second Circuit has held that “[djocuments may be sealed if specific, on the record findings are made demonstrating that closure is essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest.” Lyagosch, 435 F.3d at 120 (internal quotation marks omitted). Here, Defendants respectfully request permission to file Defendants’ summary judgment motion Exhibits A (Eastchester Police Dep’t Suppl. Compl. Reps., TTOE-000296 through 'TOE- 003544), I (Notes of Mayhew Interview, TOE-003572 through TOE-003576), and S (Felony Compl., TOE-003540) under seal, pursuant to paragraph 6 the so-ordered Agreed Protective Order/Confidentiality Agreement. See ECF No. 57 (hereinafter, “Protective Order’). While the ‘Town of Eastchester (“Eastchester”) is no longer a party to this action, the above- referenced documents were produced by Eastchester as part of this case, and the underlying bases for the Protective Order remain. Eastchester has therefore requested that the above-mentioned exhibits be filed under seal consistent with the Protective Order, given the content of these files, because the double homicide remains an unsolved case in light of Plaintiff's acquittal following his fifth jury trial in the criminal case. The Westchester Defendants therefore make this application consistent with the Protective Order and Eastchester’s request.

We thank the Court for its consideration of this matter.

Respectfully submitted, Shawna C. MacLeod Shawna C. MacLeod Senior Assistant County Attorney 148 Martine Avenue, Suite 600 White Plains, New York 10601 scma@westchestercountyny.gov (914)995-4194 Counsel for Westchester Defendants cc: All counsel of record (via ECF) Defendants' request is GRANTED. Defendants may file on ECF the unredacted versions of Exhibits A, I, and S under seal accessible only to the Court and parties to the case. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 289. Dated: September 9, 2024 White Plains, NY