Confidentiality orders have become a routine part of commercial litigation. CPLR §3103(a) allows parties to seek a protective order “denying, limiting, conditioning or regulating the use of discovery devices … to prevent unreasonable annoyance, expense, embarrassment, disadvantage, or other prejudice to any person … .” In addition to restricting the distribution and use of sensitive documents exchanged in discovery, in exceptional circumstances confidentiality orders can limit access to an “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” basis, barring litigation counsel from disclosing the designated materials to their clients.

While confidentiality orders are valuable tools in protecting competitive and other sensitive information, they are subject to abuse. Aggressive or inattentive counsel can overdesignate those documents that are protected, adding burden and expense to the opposing party. Indeed, in a recent Commercial Division case, Google was sanctioned for just that. This decision sends a stern reminder to litigation counsel of the need to be well versed on the applicable rules and standards, which we address below.

Commercial Division Sanctions

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]