Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Morningstar, Inc.
-
Filed: May 07, 2024 | Entered: May 07, 2024 Daniels v. Morningstar Inc
442(Civil Rights: Jobs) | Illinois Northern
Agreed
AGREED Confidentiality Order. Signed by the Honorable Gabriel A. Fuentes on 5/7/2024. Mailed notice. (lxk, ) (Entered: 05/07/2024)
-
Filed: May 07, 2024 | Entered: May 07, 2024 Daniels v. Morningstar Inc
442(Civil Rights: Jobs) | Illinois Northern
Minute
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Gabriel A. Fuentes: Defendant's agreed motion for protective order (doc. # 15 ) is granted. Enter Agreed Confidentiality Order. In addition to the language in Paragraph 7 of the Agreed Confidentiality Order entered today, the parties are advised that motions to seal will not be granted as to discovery documents filed with the Court unless the request complies with the common law of this Circuit. See Bond v. Utreras, 585 F.3d 1061, 1073 (7th Cir. 2009) (noting that public "has a presumptive right to access discovery materials that are filed with the court"); Baxter Int'l, Inc. v. Abbott Labs., 297 F.3d 544, 545-46 (7th Cir. 2002) (stating that filed discovery documents "that influence or underpin the judicial decision are open to public inspection unless they meet the definition of trade secrets or other categories of bona fide long-term confidentiality... In civil litigation only trade secrets, information covered by a recognized privilege (such as the attorney-client privilege), and information required by statute to be maintained in confidence (such as the name of a minor victim of sexual assault) is entitled to be kept secret"); Union Oil Co. of Cal. v. Leavell, 220 F.3d 562, 567-68 (7th Cir. 2000) ("Many a litigant would prefer that the subject matter of a case... be kept from the curious (including its business rivals and customers), but the tradition that litigation is open to the public is of very long standing."); Citizens First Nat'l Bank of Princeton v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 178 F.3d 943, 945-46 (7th Cir. 1999) (warning courts not to allow parties "to seal whatever they want" and urging them to apply "a neutral balancing of the relevant interests" in connection with any good-cause determination presented by a motion to seal). Parties moving to seal are directed to review the foregoing case law, and any motion to seal will be taken by the Court as a certification that the movant has read the applicable case law and has ensured that it is making a good-faith argument that the document in question qualifies for sealing under the Seventh Circuit's stringent standards. Further, as to Paragraph 5(b)(7), this is a highly restrictive provision which prevents counsel even from showing designated material to a prospective witness during an interview or during deposition preparation, and the Court is open to a motion to lift or modify it as necessary, while under Paragraph 5(b)(9), the parties may reach their own agreement(s) to allow such use of designated material in this fashion. Mailed notice. (lxk, ) (Entered: 05/07/2024)
-
Service | Filed: May 07, 2024 | Entered: May 07, 2024 Ghartey et al v. Morningstar YM Trucking, LLC et al
Motor Vehicle | Georgia Northern
Return of Service Executed
Return of Service Executed by Maryann Ghartey. Progressive County Mutual Insurance Co. served on 5/3/2024, answer due 5/24/2024. (Horowitz, Devin)
Stay ahead of the curve
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
- Archive of over 450,000 articles
- Database of over 2.1 million cases
- 62,000+ organization-specific pages.
- Daily and real-time news and case alerts on organizations, industries, and customized search queries.
- Significant legal events involving law firms, companies, industries, and government agencies.
- Learn more
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login