Kelly M. Liebbe and Jonathan Rute v. Stephen Courtney, M.D. and Stephen Courtney, M.D., P.A.
Opinion
Filed: 9/21/2022 11:14 AM Lynne Finley District Clerk Collin County, Texas By Suzanne Rogers Deputy Envelope ID: 68468864
Cause No. 296~034 70~2016
STEPHEN COURTNEY, M.D. AND § IN THE DISTRICT COURT STEPHEN COURTNEY, M.D., P.A., § §
Plaintiffs, § § 296TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT v. § §
KELLY M. LIEBBE, et al., § §
Defendants. § COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED MOTION TO SEAL CERTAIN TRIAL EXHIBITS AND CERTAIN EXHIBITS FROM THE CLERK'S RECORD, SUPPLEMENTAL CLERK'S RECORD, AND TWO REPORTER'S RECORDS
After having considered Plaintiffs' Second Amended Motion to Seal Certain
Trial Exhibits and Certain Exhibits from the Clerk's Record, Supplemental Clerk's
Record, and Two Reporter's Records (the "Motion") filed by Plaintiffs, Stephen
Courtney, M.D. and Stephen Courtney, M.D., P.A., (collectively, "Plaintiffs" or the
"Courtney Parties"), Defendants' Responses, and the arguments of counsel, the
Court makes the following findings and orders:
1. Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Motion to Seal seeking to
permanently seal certain trial exhibits and portions of appellate records 1 under Rule
76a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. As reflected in the Certificate of Service
1 The specific documents Plaintiffs request to perm anently seal is included in the ch art below.
Permanent Sealing Order Page I1
at the end of Plaintiffs' Motion, Defendants have been provided notice of the filing
of the Motion.
2. The Court further finds that the Plaintiffs complied with public notice
requirement within Rule 76a(3) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Specifically,
Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Motion to Seal on August 26, 2022. Plaintiffs
then filed a Public Notice on said Motion to be posted at the place where notices for
meetings of Collin County governmental bodies are required to be posted on August
26, 2022. The Public Notice was posted at the place where notices for meetings of
Collin County governmental bodies are required to be posted on August 30, 2022.
Plaintiffs filed a verified copy of the public notice with the clerk of the court in which
the case is pending and with the Clerk of the Supreme Court of Texas on August 30,
2022. The Public Notice has thus been posted for more than 14 days prior to the
hearing on the Motion to Seal. On September 20, 2022, the Collin County Constable
filed his Return of Citation by Posting confirming that the Public Notice was posted
in the lobby of the Collin County Courthouse on August 30, 2022 until September
20, 2022. Plaintiffs further filed a Notice of Filing a Return of Service attaching the
Constable's Return of Citation by Posting on September 20, 2022.
3. The specific facts supporting the permanent sealing of the exhibits and
portions of the appellate records listed below consist of their inclusion of protected
Permanent Sealing Order Page I2
health information of non~parties that federal and state statutes mandate
confidentiality unless the individual patient provides authorization for disclosure. 45
C.F.R. §§ 164.502(a) and 164.508(a); Tex. Health & Safety Code§ 181.006. The
specific facts supporting the permanent sealing of the exhibits and portions of the
appellate records listed below also consist of confidential, sensitive business and
financial information, namely individual and business tax returns, for which federal
confidentiality is required by federal law. 26 U.S.C. § 6103. Additionally, the specific
facts supporting the permanent sealing of the exhibits and portions of the appellate
records listed below consist of proprietary and competitive information within the
confidential, sensitive business and financial records.
4. The Court further finds that the Motion demonstrates patients treated
by Plaintiffs possess specific, serious, and substantial interests in permanently sealing
the court records containing their protected health information to protect their
privacy rights who did not authorize the disclosure of their protected health
information. The Court further finds that Plaintiffs possess specific, serious, and
substantial interests in sealing the court records containing their financial and
business information because disclosure of those records would result in a
competitive disadvantage, an invasion of privacy, and financial harm. The Court
further finds the Motion demonstrates that Plaintiffs' and their patients' interests in
Permanent Sealing Order Page I3
sealing these records outweigh the presumption of openness and will not cause any
adverse effect on the general public health and safety.
5. The Court further finds the Motion demonstrates there are no less
restrictive means than sealing these court records to adequately and effectively
protect Plaintiffs' and their patients' asserted interests.
6. The Court further finds Plaintiffs did not waive their right to seek the
sealing of the exhibits and portions of the appellate records listed below. During pre~
trial discovery, the Parties exchanged discovery under a Protective Order to protect
the documents, materials, and information relevant to this lawsuit, including
protected health information and other confidential, sensitive business and financial
information. Additionally, and for purposes of pre~trial hearings, motion practice,
and at trial, the parties filed and/or admitted exhibits with the Court containing
protected health information and confidential, sensitive business and financial
information. The Parties filed those documents with the Court subject to and under
the agreed protective order entered in the case. At trial, all Parties agreed on the
record to seal certain documents containing protected health information and
confidential, sensitive business and financial information. Further, the Plaintiffs do
not hold the right to waive disclosure of protected health information of the non~
party patients treated by Plaintiffs.
Permanent Sealing Order Page I4
Therefore, the Court hereby ORDERS the following relief after an open
hearing was held on Plaintiffs' Motion to Seal requesting a permanent sealing order:
1. The following documents be, and are hereby, permanently sealed:
TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER TRIAL EXHIBIT SEALED DENIED DESCRIPTION
Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 31 Exhibit 34 to Dr. Carmody's deposition / Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 90 Rute's email forwarding Bryan Taylor's medical records to himself dated May 4, 2016
/
Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 119 P&Ls to Dr. Alan Osenbaugh's Amended Expert Report / Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 120 D RGs to Dr. Alan Osenbaugh's Amended Expert Report
/
Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 121 Dr. Alan Osenbaugh's Amended Expert Report / Defendant Liebbe's Tax Returns, Dr. Stephen Exhibit No. 95 Courtney / Defendant Liebbe's Tax Returns, Eminent Exhibit No. 97 Medical Center Operating / Defendant Liebbe's Exhibit No. 98 T ax Returns, Eminent Medical Center Operating / Defendant Liebbe's Exhibit No. 99 Tax Returns, Eminent Medical Center Operating I Defendant Liebbe's Exhibit No. 100 T ax Returns, Eminent Medical Center Operating
/
/
Defendant Liebbe's Exhibit No. 101 T ax Returns, Eminent Medical Center Operating I Permanent Sealing Order Page I5
TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER TRIAL EXHIBIT SEALED DENIED DESCRIPTION
Defendant Liebbe's Tax Returns, Dr. Stephen Exhibit No. 106 Courtney / Defendant Liebbe's Tax Returns, Dr. Stephen Exhibit No. 107 Courtney I CLERK'S RECORD Nos. DESCRIPTION SEALED DENIED (APPEAL NO. 05--22--00158--CV} /
Volume 4, Clerk's Record Letter from Michael No. 1916,,1945 Alfred to Judge Roach dated 5/22/20 / SUPPLEMENTAL CLERK'S DESCRIPTION SEALED DENIED REcoRDNos. (APPEAL NO. 05--22--00158--CV} ./ Volume 2, Supplemental Patient lists attached to Clerk's Record No. l 784~ email dated 11/5/18 from 1810 Rute to Moore forwarding Exhibit 2 to Plaintiffs 6/6/16 email Supplement to Their Rule / 215 Motion to Strike Pleadings Against Kelly Liebbe
Permanent Sealing Order Page I6
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kelly M. Liebbe and Jonathan Rute v. Stephen Courtney, M.D. and Stephen Courtney, M.D., P.A. (Kelly M. Liebbe and Jonathan Rute v. Stephen Courtney, M.D. and Stephen Courtney, M.D., P.A.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.