Motion,Ex Parte: Mary Elizabeth LeMasters vs. Paul Francis Deninger, et al

• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Case Number: 19-CIV-03974

                                                          SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN MATEO COUNTY
                                                      400 County Center                         1050 Mission Road
                                                   Redwood City, CA 94063                 South San Francisco, CA 94080
                                                                     www.sanmateocourt.org

                                                                   Minute Order
              Mary Elizabeth LeMasters       vs. Paul Francis Deninger, et al                                          19-CIV-03974
                                                                                                               04/27/2021 2:00 PM
                                                                                                                     Motion to Seal
                                                                                                              Hearing Result:    Held

              Judicial Officer: Fineman, Nancy L.                       Location: Courtroom N
              Courtroom Clerk: Ashmika Segran-Teo                       Courtroom Reporter:      Chris Perez


              Minutes
              Journals
               - Matter was called at: 2:05 pm.

               Counsel Sadiel Clement for Plaintiff appeared via ZOOM.

               Counsel Meghan Herning for Defendant appeared via ZOOM.

               The Court and counsels discussed service of the Motion.

               The court finds/orders: The Court find proper notice was given.

               Tentative ruling to be adopted.

               Hearing concluded at: 2:08 pm.
              Case Events
               - Tentative ruling adopted and becomes order:;

               MOTION TO SEAL EXHIBIT A TO DECLARATION OF SADIE CLEMENT, ESQ. IN
               OPPOSITITON TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF TO ANSWER
               QUESTIONS AT DEPOSITION AND PAY SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,793.50
               FILED JANUARY 21, 2021 BY MARY ELIZABH LEMASTERS


               The   Court    finds   that  proper    notice   of  hearing    was    give.  Motion     is  unopposed      and   the
               Court’s    tentative   ruling   is to  GRANT       the  Motion     of Plaintiff   Mary    Elizabeth    LeMasters
               to Seal Exhibit A to the Declaration of Sadie Clement Filed January 21, 2021. The wrong
               document      was   attached    as  Exhibit    A   to Clement’s      Declaration     Filed   January     21,  2021,
               and   is marked     confidential    and   proprietary.    This   document      also  has   no  relevancy to     this
               action. Thus, the Court finds the requirements for sealing under Cal. Rules of Court Rule
               2.550(d) are established.         The Court specifically finds:

                        1.  Exhibit    A   to  Plaintiff’s   Motion     to Seal,   "Exhibit    A"   To   Declaration     of  Sadie
                            Clement,      Esq.   In  Opposition      To   Defendant's      Motion     to  Compel      Plaintiff   to
                            Answer Questions at Deposition and Pay Sanctions in the Amount of $4,793.50
                                                                                                                                      1
                                                                                                                   Case Number: 19-CIV-03974

                             Filed January 1, 2021         was inadvertently attached, unrelated             to this  matter, and
                             contained confidential and a proprietary information.

                2.     There   exists   an  overriding    interest   that  overcomes      the  right  of  public   access    to the
                record;

               3.    The overriding interest supports sealing the record;

               4.    A  substantial    probability     exists  that  the  overriding     interest   will  be  prejudiced     if the
               record is not sealed;

               5.     The proposed sealing is narrowly tailored; and

               6.     No less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest.

               Counsel Sadie Clement to prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for
               the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide
               written notice as required by law and the California Rules of Court.                     The proposed order
               shall specifically address California Rule of Court 2.551(e), which was not address in the
               proposed order submitted by Plaintiff.

              Others
              Comments:

             Future Hearings and Vacated Hearings
             August 24, 2021 2:00 PM Motion for Summary of Judgment/Adjudication of Issues
             Fineman, Nancy L.




                                                                                                                                      2