Eaton v. Frisby Docket Sheet and Protective Orders
NMC and others have criticized the sealing of the court file in Eaton v. Frisby. It appears that it started with an an Agreed Protective Order in 2005 that was designed to protect the confidentiality of trade secrets. That was followed by a Supplemental Protective Order later in 2005 that was also directed at trade secrets. Now most pleadings and orders are filed under seal in the case. I don't have a problem with protecting trade secrets. The problem is that protective orders designed for protecting trade secrets are routinely abused with parties designating all sorts of material as protected that are not trade secrets. A review of the docket in Eaton suggests that the parties are improperly filing documents under seal, but it's hard to say when you do not know what is in the material under the seal.
Here is a copy of a printout of the docket in the case, which lists all filings in the case until this week. This shows that many, if not most, of the pleadings and orders are now being filed under seal. I do not know why Judge Yerger is ordering the sealing of so many orders in the case, but I suspect that it has more to do with DeLaughter than trade secrets. If so, I question the correctness of sealing the orders. As a practical matter, transparency in this case is particularly important and would strengthen the public and bar's confidence in the judiciary. Judge Yerger is also closing the hearings and has reportedly kicked Clarion-Ledger reporter Jimmy Gates out of hearings. A few years ago the Ledger would have been fighting the secrecy in this case, but in today's world of struggling newspapers Gannett probably does not want to spend to money on an attorney.
