ADDITIONAL CASES WWP JV LLC, A Delaware Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff v. New York Reit Liquidating LLC, Defendant; Third-Party The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 008) 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168 were read on this motion to/for MISCELLANEOUS. The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 010) 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 182, 184 were read on this motion to/for SEAL. The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 011) 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 337, 339 were read on this motion to/for SEAL. The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 012) 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 338, 340, 442, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451, 452, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457, 458, 459, 460, 461, 462, 463, 464 were read on this motion to/for SEAL. DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff, WWP JV LLC (“WWP”), seeks orders sealing and/or redacting the unredacted documents filed in connection with this proceeding as NYSCEF Document Numbers 139, 141, and 142 (MS 008); 169, 173, and 180 (MS 010); 225 (MS 011); and 206, 207, 208, 209, and 210 (MS 012). For the following reasons, WWP’s unopposed motions are granted. Pursuant to §216.1 (a) of the Uniform Rules for Trial Courts, this Court may seal a filing “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” (22 NYCRR §216.1 [a]). The Appellate Division has emphasized that “there is a broad presumption that the public is entitled to access to judicial proceedings and court records” (Mosallem v. Berenson, 76 AD3d 345, 348 [1st Dept 2010]). “Since the right [of public access to court proceedings] is of constitutional dimension, any order denying access must be narrowly tailored to serve compelling objectives, such as a need for secrecy that outweighs the public’s right to access” (Danco Labs., Ltd. v. Chemical Works of Gedeon Richter, Ltd., 274 AD2d 1, 6 [1st Dept 2000] [emphasis added]; see also, e.g. Gryphon Dom. VI, LLC v. APP Intern. Fin. Co., B.V., 28 AD3d 322, 324 [1st Dept 2006]). “Furthermore, because confidentiality is the exception and not the rule, ‘the party seeking to seal court records has the burden to demonstrate compelling circumstances to justify restricting public access’” (Maxim, Inc. v. Feifer, 145 AD3d 516, 517 [1st Dept 2016] [citations omitted]). The Court has reviewed WWP’s proposed targeted redactions of the Documents filed as NYSCEF 139, 169, 180, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, and 225, and finds that they comport with the applicable sealing standard as laid out in Mosallem, 76 AD3d at 348-350, and its progeny, in that the redacted portions of the document contain sensitive and confidential business and financial information. Furthermore, the Court agrees that NYSCEF Document Numbers 141, 142, and 173 should be sealed. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that WWP’s motions to seal (MS 08, 10, 11, and 12) are granted; it is further ORDERED that the County Clerk shall maintain the unredacted documents filed as NYSCEF Document Numbers 139, 141, 142, 169, 173, 180, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, and 225 under seal, so that the documents may be accessible only by the parties, their counsel, and authorized court personnel; it is further ORDERED that the parties shall file to the public docket redacted copies of the unredacted documents filed as NYSCEF Document Numbers 139, 169, 180, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, and 225, which redacted copies the Clerk shall allow to remain on the docket in their redacted form; it is further ORDERED that this Decision shall not be construed as sealing any document at trial, nor as preclusive of any determination of any claims that some or all of these documents are privileged; and it is further ORDERED that as it relates to future submissions, made by any party, that contain subject matter that the court has authorized to be sealed by this Decision and Order, parties may file a joint stipulation, to be So Ordered, which will authorize the filing of such future submissions to be filed in redacted form on NYSCEF, provided that an unredacted copy of any document is contemporaneously filed under seal. This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court. CHECK ONE: CASE DISPOSED X NON-FINAL DISPOSITION X GRANTED DENIED GRANTED IN PART OTHER APPLICATION: SETTLE ORDER SUBMIT ORDER CHECK IF APPROPRIATE: INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT REFERENCE Dated: September 26, 2024
