Lenihan v. Trustage Financial Group, Inc.

District Court, D. Montana·Decided September 18, 2024·No. 2:23-cv-00072·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA BUTTE DIVISION

MARTHA LENIHAN CV 23-72-BU-KLD Plaintiff,

vs. ORDER

TRUSTAGE FINANCIAL GROUP, INCL., et al.,

Defendants.

Defendants TruStage Financial Group and MEMBERS Life Insurance Company have filed an unopposed motion for a protective order. (Doc. 55). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ motion is GRANTED and the following stipulated protective order is hereby entered: 1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS Discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than pursuing this litigation is warranted. Accordingly, the parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the following Stipulated Protective Order. The parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. 2. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT Discovery in this action is likely to involve certain non-public commercial information, as well as other sensitive financial, technical, and/or proprietary information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution of this action is warranted. Such confidential and proprietary materials and information consist of, among other things: Defendants’ confidential business practices, guidelines, policies, or manuals that govern the conduct of Defendants’ insurance business; other confidential commercial information (including information implicating privacy rights of third parties); and information otherwise generally unavailable to the public, or which may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law.1 Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable, necessary uses of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of trial, to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter. It is the intent of the parties that information will not be designated as confidential for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated without a good faith belief that it has been

1 For example, the documents sought in Plaintiff’s first set of requests for production include, amongst other things, Defendants’: underwriting guidelines and manuals; instructions to sales agents; information regarding the number of insurance policies in effect, claims submitted, claim denials, and amount paid on claims; market conduct examinations; instructional materials provided to agents; marketing and sales materials exchanged between Defendants; company newsletters; bulletins, guidelines, memos, and/or directions provided to claims employees; sales commissions; sales revenue; claims guidelines and manuals; sales commission formulas; and employee personnel files. maintained in a confidential, non-public manner, and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 3. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PROCEDURE FOR FILING DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER The parties further acknowledge, as set forth in Section 14.3, below, that this Stipulated Protective Order does not entitle them to file confidential information under seal; Local Civil Rule 26.4(b) sets forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the Court to file material subject to the protective order. The parties acknowledge they may redact the documents but may not file them under seal. L.R. 26.4(b). There is a strong presumption that the public has a right of access to judicial proceedings and records in civil cases. In connection with non-dispositive motions, good cause must be shown to support a filing a document with redactions. L.R. 26.4(b)(2)(B); see also Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-81 (9th Cir. 2006), Phillips v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002), Makar-Welbon v. Sony Electrics, Inc., 187 F.R.D. 576, 577 (E.D. Wis. 1999) (even stipulated protective orders require good cause showing), and a specific showing of good cause or compelling reasons with proper evidentiary support and legal justification, must be made with respect to Protected Material (as defined in Section 4.14 below) that a party seeks to file with redactions. The parties’ mere designation of Disclosure or Discovery Material as CONFIDENTIAL does not—without the submission of competent evidence by declaration, establishing that the material sought to be filed with redactions qualifies as confidential, privileged, or otherwise protectable—constitute good cause. Further, if a party requests redaction related to a dispositive motion or trial, then compelling reasons, not only good cause, for redaction must be shown, and the relief sought shall be narrowly tailored to serve the specific interest to be protected. See L.R. 26.4(b)(2)(A); Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass’n., 605 F.3d 665, 677-79 (9th Cir. 2010). For each item or type of information, document, or thing sought to be filed or introduced with redactions, the party seeking protection must articulate compelling reasons, supported by specific facts and legal justification, for the requested order. Again, competent evidence supporting the application to file documents with redactions must be provided by declaration. In the event a Receiving Party2 seeks to file a Designating Party’s3 Protected Material,4 the Parties agree to the following procedures: (1) Receiving Party shall file a form motion indicating it intends to rely upon Protected Material in support thereof but that it takes no position and makes no argument as to designation of the material as Protected Material and whether the Protected Material should be redacted in accordance with this Court’s local rules and binding precedent; (2) Receiving Party shall file the form motion on the date it files its motion for substantive relief and not before; (3) Receiving Party’s form motion shall indicate the Bates-label of the Protected Material so Designating Party knows what material Receiving Party seeks to file and any exhibits filed in support of the substantive motion shall have a placeholder exhibit in place of the Protected Material; (3) Within 48-hours of Receiving Party’s form motion, Designating Party shall file a brief in support of filing the Protected Material with redactions, including indicating what material therein it seeks to redact;

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

Lenihan v. Trustage Financial Group, Inc., (D. Mont. 2024).

Lenihan v. Trustage Financial Group, Inc. (Lenihan v. Trustage Financial Group, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'N
605 F.3d 665 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu
447 F.3d 1172 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)
Makar-Wellbon v. Sony Electronics, Inc.
187 F.R.D. 576 (E.D. Wisconsin, 1999)