Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 22STCV16892, Date: 2025-05-15 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV16892 Hearing Date: May 15, 2025 Dept: 14
#11
Case Background
This is an action for violations of the FEHA. Plaintiff
alleges that while she was employed as an associate community police
department, she suffered harassment and wrongful termination after informing
her direct supervisor of her pregnancy and disability.
On May 20, 2022, Plaintiff Jacqueline Rivera filed her
Complaint against Defendants City of Los Angeles (City), Aaron McCraney,
Suzanna Kazarian, Catharina Emestica, and Norma Zamora.
On July 26, 2022, Plaintiff filed a First Amended
Complaint (FAC).
On April 1, 2025, Defendant City filed this motion to
seal.
Instant Pleading
City moves to seal Exhibit No. 26 submitted with
Defendant’s reply to its motion for summary judgment.
Decision
City’s motion to seal is GRANTED.
Discussion
City moves to seal a page form a complaint
investigation, file No. 21-001438. City filed a notice of lodging with respect
to this document on March 21, 2025.
Pursuant to California Rules of Court Rule 2.550
the court may seal a record “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.”
(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.550(d).)
Here, City’s Deputy City Attorney testifies that the lodged document
contains information about employee complaints that are protected under Pitchess.
The Court is satisfied that City has a privacy interest which overrides the
public’s interest in accessing the record. Additionally, City would be
prejudiced if the record is not sealed. Finally, the proposed sealing only
concerns one page and no less restrictive means exists to protect City’s
interest in protecting the document. Therefore, the document lodged by City on
March 21, 2025 is sealed.
Conclusion
City’s motion to seal is GRANTED.