Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc.
435 U.S. 589 (1978) Cited 6,017 times 9 Legal AnalysesHolding that "business information that might harm a litigant's competitive standing" can constitute a sufficient reason to preserve records under seal
Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
331 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 3,363 timesHolding that the Phillips exception is "expressly limited to the status of materials . . . attached to a non-dispositive motion"
Phillips v. General Motors Corp.
307 F.3d 1206 (9th Cir. 2002) Cited 2,238 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that the party or intervenor “seeking protection bears the burden of showing specific prejudice or harm will result if no protective order is granted”
Gannett Co. v. Depasquale
443 U.S. 368 (1979) Cited 954 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that the public has no constitutional right to attend pre-trial proceedings
Brown Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. F.T.C
710 F.2d 1165 (6th Cir. 1983) Cited 929 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding that the First Amendment limits judicial discretion to seal documents in a civil case
Joy v. North
692 F.2d 880 (2d Cir. 1982) Cited 478 timesHolding that “only the most compelling reasons can justify the total foreclosure of public and professional scrutiny” to a court's “basis for the adjudication”
Zapata Corp. v. Maldonado
430 A.2d 779 (Del. 1981) Cited 346 times 26 Legal AnalysesHolding that limited discovery is appropriate with respect to "the independence and good faith of the committee and the bases supporting its conclusions"
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Standard Fin. Mgmt. Corp.
830 F.2d 404 (1st Cir. 1987) Cited 237 timesHolding that "relevant documents which are submitted to, and accepted by, a court of competent jurisdiction in the course of adjudicatory proceedings, become documents to which the presumption of public access applies," and "[o]nce those submissions come to the attention of the district judge, they can fairly be assumed to play a role in the court's deliberations"
Matter of Continental Ill. Sec. Litigation
732 F.2d 1302 (7th Cir. 1984) Cited 237 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that order granting access did not merit reversal despite insufficiently specific findings but noting that findings on the record are more crucial for orders denying access
In re Perrigo Co.
128 F.3d 430 (6th Cir. 1997) Cited 125 timesHolding that "forced disclosure of privileged material may bring about irreparable harm" and, thus, the petitioner appealing an order requiring the production of a privileged statement had "no adequate means to attain the discovery relief it [sought] except by mandamus. . . ."
Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 Cited 95,025 times 653 Legal AnalysesAdopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37