Edward L. Jack, Jr. v. The Hartford d/b/a Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Company

• Court: District Court, S.D. West Virginia
• Decided: November 7, 2025
• Docket: 3:25-cv-00428
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

HUNTINGTON DIVISION

EDWARD L. JACK, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-00428

THE HARTFORD d/b/a HARTFORD LIFE & ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Defendant The Hartford’s Motion to Seal the Administrative Record (ECF 9). The Court GRANTS the Motion. There is a presumption of public access to judicial records. See Ashcroft v. Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 288, 302 (4th Cir. 2000). A district court may, however, “seal documents if the public’s right of access is outweighed by competing interests . . . .” Id. (quoting In re Knight Pub. Co., 743 F.2d 231, 235 (4th Cir. 1984)). To seal documents, the court must “(1) provide public notice of the request to seal and allow interested parties a reasonable opportunity to object, (2) consider less drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, and (3) provide specific reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents and for rejecting the alternatives.” Id. Here, Defendant’s Motion was filed on the Court’s public docket, so the public has had notice of the motion and an opportunity to object. The public’s right of access to the administrative record is outweighed by competing interests because the record contains confidential and sensitive information, including medical records, employment information, and social security numbers. The Court has considered less drastic alternatives to sealing the documents. However, in light of the record’s length, alternatives to sealing, including redaction, are not feasible. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Seal the Administrative Record (ECF 9). The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to file the administrative record (ECF Nos. 9-3, 9-4, 9-5, 9-6, 9-7, 9-8, 9-9) under seal. Defendant’s Motion to Seal (ECF 9) and proposed order (ECF 9-2) should not be sealed. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented parties.

ENTER: November 7, 2025

Y , O LV) LL ROBERT C. CHAMBERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-