Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 21STCV06362, Date: 2023-06-21 Tentative Ruling

DEPARTMENT 56 JUDGE HOLLY J. FUJIE, LAW AND MOTION RULINGS. The court makes every effort to post tentative rulings by 5.00 pm of the court day before the hearing. The tentative ruling will not become the final ruling until the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(a)(2)], and are also available in the courtroom on the day of the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(b)]. If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance, all counsel must agree and choose which counsel will give notice. That counsel must 1) call Dept 56 by 8:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing (213/633-0656) and state that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling, and 2) serve notice of the ruling on all parties. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary and all parties should appear at the hearing in person or by Court Call. Court reporters are not provided, and parties who want a record of motions and other proceedings must hire a privately retained certified court reporter.

Case Number: 21STCV06362    Hearing Date: December 7, 2023    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

            MOVING PARTY: Defendant The Board of Trustees of the California State University (“Moving Defendant”)

            The Court has considered the moving papers.  No opposition papers were filed.  Any opposition papers were required to have been filed and served at least nine court days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure section 1005, subdivision (b).

BACKGROUND

This action arises out of an employment relationship.  The currently operative second amended complaint (the “SAC”) alleges: (1) discrimination; (2) harassment; (3) retaliation; (4) failure to prevent, investigate and remedy harassment and discrimination; (5) whistleblower retaliation; and (6) reprisal/retaliation. 

On October 13, 2023, Moving Defendant filed a motion to seal (the “Motion”) portions of documents that were filed in support of Plaintiff’s opposition to Moving Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and Moving Defendant’s reply papers. 

DISCUSSION

Under California Rules of Court (“CRC”), rule 2.550 (c), unless confidentiality is required by law, court records are presumed to be open.  (CRC, r. 2.550 (c).)  Subject to certain exceptions, a court record must not be filed under seal without a court order.  (Overstock.com, Inc. v. Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (2014) 231 Cal.App.4th 471, 486.)  A party requesting that a record be filed under seal must file a motion or an application for an order sealing the record.  (CRC, r. 2.551 (b).)  The motion or application must be accompanied by a memorandum and a declaration containing facts sufficient to justify the sealing.  (Id.)  In order for records to be sealed, a trial court must hold a hearing and expressly find that: (1) there exists an overriding interest supporting closure and/or sealing; (2) there is a substantial probability that the interest will be prejudiced absent closure and/or sealing; (3) the proposed closure and/or sealing is narrowly tailored to serve the overriding interest; and (4) there is no less restrictive means of achieving the overriding interest.  (Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Superior Court (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1273, 1279.)  Since court records are public records, the burden rests on the party seeking to deny public access to those records to establish compelling reasons why and to what extent these records should be made private.  (Mary R. v. B. & R. Corp. (1983) 149 Cal.App.3d 308, 317.)  

            The Motion concerns documents that contain personnel records of third-party employees. Public employees have a legally protected interest in their personnel files.  (BRV, Inc. v. Superior Court (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 742, 756.)  The Court finds that Moving Defendant has satisfied its burden to justify the partial sealing of the identified documents.  For this reason and because it is unopposed, the Court GRANTS the Motion.  (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.) 

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

    Dated this 7th day of December 2023