Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 21STCV07589, Date: 2023-05-17 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV07589 Hearing Date: May 17, 2023 Dept: 28
Plaintiffs Desiree Thabet, Myles Baqueiro, Izeah Baqueiro and the Estate of Abdalla Thabet’s Motion to Seal
Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On February 25, 2021, Plaintiffs Desiree Thabet (“Thabet”), Myles Baqueiro (“Myles”), Izeah Baqueiro (“Izeah”) and the Estate of Abdalla Thabet (“Estate”) filed this action against Defendants Bank of America (“BoA”), Daniel Meza (“Meza”), Walter Meneses (“Meneses”) and Andrew Feusier (“Feusier”) for two causes of action for negligence (wrongful death).
On July 30, 2021, Plaintiffs filed the FAC.
On September 1, 2021, Feusier filed an answer.
On October 1, 2021, BoA filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants Meza and Meneses for equitable indemnity, apportionment and declaratory relief. On March 23, 2022, the clerk entered default against Meneses and Meza.
On February 26, 2021, Plaintiffs Amtrust North America (“ANA”) and Security National Insurance Company (“SNI”) against Defendant BoA for general negligence and premises liability.
On April 2, 2021, BoA filed an answer.
The actions were consolidated on May 18, 2022.
On April 26, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Seal to be heard on May 17, 2023. On May 8, 2023, BoA filed a notice of non-opposition.
There is no currently scheduled trial date.
PARTY’S REQUESTS
Plaintiffs request the Court seal the unredacted petitioner for compromise of the minors’ claims. Plaintiff also requests the Court advance the hearing on the petitions.
LEGAL STANDARD
Under CRC 2.550(d) “[t]he court may order that a record be filed under seal only if it expressly finds facts that establish: (1) There exists an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access to the record; (2) The overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3) A substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed; (4) The proposed sealing is narrowly tailored; and (5) No less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest.”
DISCUSSION
The right of public access to the record is generally overcome when there is a highly confidential piece of information to be sealed. Case law has held that settlement agreements are generally considered to be private and support the need for confidentiality. Henshaw, Winkler, Draa, Marsh & Still v. Superior Court (1996) 51 Cal. App. 4th 233, 241.) All appearing parties have agreed that the financial terms of the settlement would be confidential. The Court does not find any overriding public interest in access to terms of the settlement, as it places Plaintiffs’ legitimate privacy interests at risk. It also provides access to potential financial details or future settlements made by Defendants, which may impact litigation against Defendants moving forward. The sealing is narrowly tailored to only the redacted portions of the petitioners for minor’s compromise, as unredacted versions will be filed and publicly available. There are no less restrictive means of protecting Plaintiffs’ financial privacy. The Court finds good cause and grants the motion.
The Court will not vacate and advance the hearings on the minors’ compromise.
CONCLUSION
Plaintiffs Desiree Thabet, Myles Baqueiro, Izeah Baqueiro and the Estate of Abdalla Thabet’s Motion to Seal is GRANTED. The unredacted versions of the petitioners for minor’s compromise are to be sealed. Plaintiffs are ordered to file redacted, unsealed of the petitions.
Moving Party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.
Moving Party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.
The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.