A federal judge refused to seal a settlement agreement in a medical malpractice case brought against the U.S. government, an Augusta hospital and a doctor stemming from injuries a newborn suffered at birth.

The plaintiffs—a U.S. Army soldier and her son—asked Chief Judge J. Randal Hall of the U.S. District Court for Georgia's Southern District to seal the settlement and attorney compensation details, arguing they had an "inherent expectation of privacy with regard to the terms and conditions of settlements reached between private parties to civil lawsuits."

The secrecy requirement was part of the settlement agreement, they said. The settlement motion said there would be a separate agreement with the U.S. government, which has not yet been filed.

Southern District Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason Blanchard, lead attorney for the government in the case, said Hall's order "does not involve the United States, as the United States did not seek to seal any settlement documents between Plaintiff and the United States."

In rejecting the request for secrecy, Hall wrote that, because the settlement requires court approval for resolving the claims of the minor child, "C.W."—its details are public documents, Hall wrote in his Dec. 26 order. There was no showing as to how C.W.'s privacy interests outweigh those of the public.

"Of note," said Hall," the public docket in this case is replete with sensitive information regarding C.W., including numerous expert reports, which no party has sought to seal. The Court fails to see how, in this case, the settlement amount alone reveals such sensitive information about C.W. that it overcomes the public's right of access."

Hall also denied the motion to approve the settlement—which was filed in redacted form—without prejudice, ruling that it could be refiled unredacted.

Hall also said that, if his denial of the motion was a deal-killer, the parties can withdraw from the settlement and notify the court of their decision.

Plaintiffs counsel includes Chuck Pardue of Augusta's Pardue & Coskrey, Moore Law Firm principal Leighton Moore and Nelson Tyrone III and Daniel Conner Jr. of The Tyrone Law Firm.

They did not respond to requests for comment Friday, but they filed a motion seeking an emergency telephone conference on Hall's order on Dec. 31.

The request said the defense insisted that confidentiality was consented to during the settlement mediations, while the plaintiffs "wish only to have the settlement move forward as quickly as possible in order to resolve unpaid and ongoing medical expenses for CW" and provide therapy and such necessities as an accessible vehicle and housing.

Defendant Dr. Venkatesan Gorantla, Augusta Physician Services and Trinity Hospital in Augusta, are represented by James Painter and F. Michael Taylor of Augusta's Brennan, Wasden & Painter. They did not respond to requests for comment.

As detailed in court filings, Sherecia Willis was stationed at Fort Gordon in 2016 when she gave birth to C.W. after a 40-week, "uneventful" pregnancy.

After his delivery at Trinity, which was under contract to provide care for military personnel, C.W. was found to have suffered fetal acidosis and hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy that led to decreased oxygen and blood flow prior to delivery, causing permanent brain damage.

In 2017 Willis and CW sued the United States and other defendants in the Southern District in litigation that was "vigorously contested as all defendants denied liability, causation, and extent of damages," according to the motion to seal.

Last September, following a mediation before U.S. Magistrate Judge Brian Epps, the parties reached a settlement for all of Willis' claims.

In their October motion to approve the confidential settlement, the plaintiffs lawyers wrote that while having Hall review and sign off on the settlement served the parties' interests, "their interests are equally served by preserving their privacy rights with regard to the terms and conditions of this settlement. The privacy rights of the parties are protected if access is limited to those documents which specify the terms and/or conditions of the settlement, which is why the Settlement Agreement has been provided to the Court under seal."

In his order nixing the secrecy bid, Hall said none of the reasons advanced were persuasive, and that court records are presumptively open to the public.

Hall said the only argument that might have been appropriate for sealing the settlement was that C.W.'s privacy interests could be impacted.

Citing prior legal precedent, the judge said there have been rulings protecting information that might reveal details about a minor's educational, medical or mental health details, in which case courts have found that the child's privacy rights outweighed those of the public.

But in reviewing the settlement documents, the judge said the only information they contained concerning C.W. was the amount of money to be paid.  That is generally not enough to favor confidentiality, Hall said.

Hall ordered the parties to re-file the motion and supporting documents in unredacted form.

"Should plaintiffs and Augusta defendants wish to withdraw from the settlement agreement as a consequence of this decision, they shall file a joint statement to that effect," Hall wrote.