Seaport Mgt. Dev. Co., LLC v. Shop Architects, P.C.

2024 NY Slip Op 33572(U)

• Court: New York Supreme Court, New York County
• Decided: October 1, 2024
• Docket: Index No. 657263/2019
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Seaport Mgt. Dev. Co., LLC v Shop Architects, P.C. 2024 NY Slip Op 33572(U) October 1, 2024 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: Index No. 657263/2019 Judge: Andrea Masley Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/01/2024 12:57 P~ INDEX NO. 657263/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 728 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/01/2024

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: COMMERCIAL DIVISION PART 48 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

SEAPORT MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INDEX NO. 657263/2019 LLC,

Plaintiff, MOTION DATE

- V - MOTION SEQ. NO. 018 SHOP ARCHITECTS, P.C., HUNTER ROBERTS CONSTRUCTION GROUP, LLC, SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC DECISION+ ORDER ON SYSTEMS USA, INC., MOTION Defendants. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

SHOP ARCHITECTS, P.C., Third-Party Index No. 595060/2020 Plaintiff,

-against-

SCHNACKEL ENGINEERS, INC.,

Defendant. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

HUNTER ROBERTS CONSTRUCTION GROUP, LLC, Second Third-Party Index No. 595178/2020 Plaintiff,

B&G ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS OF NEW YORK,

Defendant. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

HUNTER ROBERTS CONSTRUCTION GROUP, LLC, Third Third-Party Index No. 595713/2020 Plaintiff,

ENCLOS CORP.,

Defendant. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

HON. ANDREA MASLEY:

657263/2019 SEAPORT MANAGEMENT vs. SHOP ARCHITECTS, P.C. Page 1 of4 Motion No. 018

[* 1] 1 of 4 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/01/2024 12:57 P~ INDEX NO. 657263/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 728 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/01/2024

The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 018) 660, 661, 662, 663, 664,665,666,694,699 were read on this motion to/for SEAL

In motion seq. no. 018, plaintiff Seaport Management Development Company

LLC moves to redact sensitive and non-public commercial business information

contained in portions of the deposition of George Giaquinto dated October 7, 2021

(NYSCEF 662). 1 There is no opposition to this motion and no indication that the press

or public is interested in this matter.

"Under New York law, there is a broad presumption that the public is entitled to

access to judicial proceedings and court records." (Masai/em v Berenson, 76 AD3d

345, 348 [1st Dept 2010] [citations omitted].) The public's right to access is, however,

not absolute, and under certain circumstances, "public inspection of court records has

been limited by numerus statutes." (Id. at 349.) One of those statutes is section 216.1

(a) of the Uniform Rules for Trial Courts, which empowers courts to seal documents

upon a written finding of good cause. It provides:

"Except where otherwise provided by statute or rule, a court shall not enter an order in any action or proceeding sealing the court records, whether in whole or in part, except upon a written finding of good cause, which shall specify the grounds thereof. In determining whether good cause has been shown, the court shall consider the interests of the public as well as of the parties. Where it appears necessary or desirable, the court may prescribe appropriate notice and opportunity to be heard." (22 NYCRR 216.1.)

The "party seeking to seal court records has the burden to demonstrate

compelling circumstances to justify restricting public access" to the documents.

(Masai/em, 76 AD3d at 349 [citations omitted].) For example, in the business context,

1 A redacted copy of this document is publicly available at NYSCEF 663. 657263/2019 SEAPORT MANAGEMENT vs. SHOP ARCHITECTS, P.C. Page 2 of 4 Motion No. 018

[* 2] 2 of 4 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/01/2024 12:57 P~ INDEX NO. 657263/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 728 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/01/2024

courts have sealed records where the disclosure of documents "could threaten a

business's competitive advantage." (Id. at 350-351 [citations omitted].) Records

concerning private financial information may be sealed where there has not been a

showing of relevant public interest in the disclosure of that information. ( See Dawson v

White & Case, 184 AD2d 246, 247 [1st Dept 1992].) A party "ought not to be required

to make their private financial information public ... where no substantial public interest

would be furthered by public access to that information." (D'Amour v Ohrenstein &

Brown, 17 Misc 3d 1130[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 52207[U], *20 [Sup Ct, NY County 2007]

[citations omitted].)

Plaintiff has demonstrated good cause to redact NYSCEF 662. The proposed

redactions are limited. Disclosure of such commercially sensitive business and financial

information regarding plaintiff and its tenants could cause competitive harm and put

plaintiff in a competitive disadvantage.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further

ORDERED that and the County Clerk, upon service of this order, shall

permanently seal NYSCEF 662; and it is further

ORDERED the New York County Clerk shall restrict access to the sealed

documents with access to be granted only to authorized court personnel and designees,

the parties and counsel of record in this action, and any representative of a party or of

counsel of record upon presentation to the County Clerk of written authorization from

counsel; and it is further

657263/2019 SEAPORT MANAGEMENT vs. SHOP ARCHITECTS, P.C. Page 3 of 4 Motion No. 018

[* 3] 3 of 4 !FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/01/2024 12:57 PM! INDEX NO. 657263/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 728 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/01/2024

ORDERED that plaintiff shall serve a copy of this order upon the Clerk of the

Court and the Clerk of the General Clerk's Office in accordance with the procedures set

forth in the Protocol on Courthouse and County Clerk Procedures for Electronically Filed

Cases (accessible at the "E-Filing" page on the court's website at the address

www.nycourts.gov/supctmanh)]; and it is further

ORDERED that if any party seeks to redact identical information in future filings

that the court is permitting to be redacted here, that party shall submit a proposed

sealing order to the court (via SFC-Part48@nycourts.gov and NYSCEF) instead of filing

another seal motion; and it is further

ORDERED that this order does not authorize sealing or redacting for purposes of

trial.

10/1/2024 DATE ANDREA MASLEY, J.S.C. CHECK ONE: CASE DISPOSED NON-FINAL DISPOSITION

GRANTED □ DENIED GRANTED IN PART □ OTHER APPLICATION: SETTLE ORDER SUBMIT ORDER

CHECK IF APPROPRIATE: INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT □ REFERENCE

657263/2019 SEAPORT MANAGEMENT vs. SHOP ARCHITECTS, P.C. Page4 of 4 Motion No. 018

[* 4] 4 of 4