Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM

An Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charge brought against Perkins Coie as part of a job discrimination suit in New York federal court cannot remain sealed, U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman of the Southern District of New York ruled Tuesday.

The decision was a setback of sorts for each litigant—a former secretary who worked at Perkins Coie, who wanted the EEOC documents to be opened only with redaction, as well as the law firm, which had also sought redactions.

But citing First Amendment and common-law presumptions of public access, Furman said the plaintiff, New York resident Brenda Canada, could not keep the EEOC documents from public view, and Perkins Coie also could not get its redactions.

“Plaintiff has incorporated the EEOC charge into her Complaint—so much so that Plaintiff's reference to the EEOC charge constitutes the entirety of her supporting factual allegations,” Furman noted. “[T]he Court could not adjudicate Plaintiff's claims without considering it.”

In December, Canada requested the EEOC documents remain redacted going forward, “to avoid public disclosure of the names.”

“The fact is some of these individuals are unaware of this action, so I want to protect myself from being sued,” she argued. “This is a large law firm, which the media regularly tracks.”

In her pro se action, Canada, a black woman who worked as a legal secretary for Perkins Coie, alleges in her EEOC claim that other unnamed members of the firm's support staff in the New York City office received preferential treatment by attorneys whose identities are hidden in the filing.

In the complaint, Canada alleged the relationships between the attorneys and certain support employees resulted in favoritism. Canada stated that she ultimately was terminated at the company after being cited multiple times for “continuing to not be a team player.” She denies this was the case, arguing that she was handling a workload supporting seven people.

She claimed that she faced a hostile work environment, created by at least two employees she said had the “propensity for bullying.”

In its response, the firm claims Canada resigned in lieu of being fired in April 2016, and denied the allegations against its employees. In respond to Canada's request to seal, attorneys with the firm said it would be “preferable” to not have the EEOC documents included with the complaint “with or without redactions.” Absent this, the firm stated that “at a minimum” the names of those in the papers should be redacted.

Furman, however, said he saw “no basis to maintain the EEOC charge under seal or in redacted form,” denying Canada's motion.

Canada did not respond to a request for comment.

Perkins Coie partner Adam Schuman represents the firm in the action. He did not respond to a separate request for comment.

Related:

Gibson Dunn, Perkins Coie and Lowenstein Sandler Fell Victim to Anna Delvey, NY Court Papers Show

Outten & Golden Hires LGBT Specialist at 'Critical Inflection Point' for Discrimination Cases

Dentons Settles Ex-Employee's Sexual Harassment Lawsuit