Judge Theresa M. Traber, Case Number: 23STCV20095, Date: 2024-04-23 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 23STCV20095, Date: 2024-04-23 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV20095 Hearing Date: April 23, 2024 Dept: 47

Tentative Ruling

Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47

HEARING DATE: April 23, 2024 TRIAL DATE: NOT SET

CASE: Tristar Claims Management Services, Inc. v. Jackson Risk Management, Inc.

CASE NO.: 23STCV20095

MOTION TO SEAL

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Tristar Claims Management Services, Inc.

RESPONDING PARTY(S): No response on eCourt as of 4/18/24

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

This is an action for conversion that was filed on August 22, 2023. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s principal misappropriated confidential and sensitive personal information belonging to Plaintiff’s claimants.

Plaintiff moves to file an exhibit accompanying a declaration in support of Plaintiff’s pending Motion for Default Judgment and Permanent Injunction under seal.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff moves to file Exhibit B of the Declaration of Michael Kunkel in Support of Plaintiff’s pending Motion for Default Judgment and Permanent Injunction under seal.

The sealing of court records is governed by California Rules of Court rules 2.550 and 2.551. (Mercury Interactive Corp. v. Klein (2007) 158 Cal.App.4th 60, 68.) The presumption of open access to court records does not apply to “records that are required to be kept confidential by law.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.550(a)(3).) A party seeking to seal a court record or seeking to file a record under seal must do so by motion or application supported by a declaration showing facts justifying the record’s sealing. (Id., rule 2.551(b)(1).) California Rules of Court rule 2.550(d) states: “The 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.”

(Id. Rule 2.550(d).)

Once sealed, a record can only be unsealed by order of court. (Id., rule 2.551(h)(1).) So long as it remains under seal, all parties must refrain from filing anything not under seal that would disclose the sealed matter. (Id., rule 2.551(c).) If a party files a new document referring to sealed matter, it must submit an unredacted version of the document under seal and a redacted one for the public record. (Id., rule 2.551(b)(5); H.B. Fuller Co. v. Doe (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 879, 889.)

The Exhibit which Plaintiff seeks to have sealed is a spreadsheet listing interactions of a laptop used by Defendant’s principal with Defendant’s Google Mail account and Plaintiff’s claims management software. Plaintiff contends that the Exhibit contains sensitive personal information including claimant names, claim numbers, summary information, and settlement information, in which the claimants have an overriding privacy interest. Plaintiff contends that this information could expose Plaintiff to liability if it were publicly disclosed. Plaintiff also argues that the proposed sealing is narrowly tailored because it only concerns a single exhibit and that there is no less restricted means available to protect the confidential information.

Upon reviewing the materials lodged conditionally under seal, the Court finds that the materials which Plaintiff moves to seal reference, include, or constitute confidential personal information involving claimants and thus there is an overriding constitutional privacy interest that overcomes the right of public access to these records and supports sealing the record. The Court also finds that there is a substantial probability that this interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed as that interest is, by definition, an interest against disclosure of these materials. The Court also finds that the proposed sealing is narrowly tailored to shield only the materials which should be protected from disclosure, and that there is no less restrictive means to achieve the interest in protecting these materials from disclosure under that section.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to File Exhibit B of the Kunkel Declaration Under Seal is GRANTED.

Moving Party to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 23, 2024 ___________________________________

Theresa M. Traber

Judge of the Superior Court

Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.