Hays v. Park City School District et al, No. 2:2013cv01134 - Document 86 (D. Utah 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 81 Motion to file Motion for Summary Judgment Under Seal; granting in part and denying in part 83 Motion to Seal 78 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Signed by Magistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse on 3/1/16 (alt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Hays v. Park City School District et al Doc. 86 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION HILARY BERTAGNOLE HAYS, an individual, Plaintiff, vs. PARK CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of Utah, DR. EMBER CONLEY, an individual, and RAY TIMOTHY, an individual, Defendants. MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S AND DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO SEAL (ECF NOS. 81, 83) THE SUMMARY JUDGMENT, WITH SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM AND EXHIBITS Case No. 2:13-cv-01134-JNP-EJF Judge Jill Parrish Magistrate Evelyn J. Furse This Court looks to Deseret News Publishing Co. v. Salt Lake County, 2008 UT 26, 182 P.3d 372, in deciding this motion. While GRAMA does provide protection for employee records, the public interest in the conduct of public employees engaged in a lawsuit regarding performance of public duties outweighs the individual interests in preserving personal privacy. Deseret News, 2008 UT 26, ¶¶ 47–52. The Court finds the students’ interests in preserving their personal privacy outweigh the public interest in knowing their specific identities. Based on the motions of Plaintiff Hilary Bertagnole Hays and Defendant Park City School District pursuant to DUCiv R 5-2, and good cause appearing, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS as follows: 1. That Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, with supporting memorandum of law and exhibits, be and hereby are sealed. Dockets.Justia.com 2. That Plaintiff refile a redacted version of the Motion for Summary Judgment, with supporting memorandum of law and exhibits, redacting only the names and any personal identifiers of all students. 3. That Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, with supporting memorandum of law and exhibits, be and hereby are sealed. 4. That Defendant refile a redacted version of the Motion for Summary Judgment, with supporting memorandum of law and exhibits, redacting only the names and any personal identifiers of all students. DATED this 1st day of March, 2016. BY THE COURT: _______________________________________ EVELYN J. FURSE United States Magistrate Judge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
