Buhannic v TradingScreen, Inc.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Buhannic v TradingScreen, Inc. 2018 NY Slip Op 33262(U) December 17, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653624/2016 Judge: Marcy Friedman Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [*FILED: 1] NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/17/2018 04:21 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 484 INDEX NO. 653624/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/17/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NE\V YORK COUNTY OF NE\V YORK: COMMERCIAL DIVISION PART 60 ---------------------------------------------------------------------)( PHILIPPE BUHANNIC and PATRICK BUHANNIC, individually and derivatively on behalf of TRADINGSCREEN; INC., INDEX NO. 653624/2016 MOTION DATE Plaintiffs, l\IIOTION SEQ. NO. -vTRADINGSCREEN, INC.; PIERRE SCHROEDER; PIERO GRANDI; FRANK PLACENTI; ROBERT TRUDEAU; TCV VI, L.P., and TCV MEMBER FUND, LP., 017 DECISION AND ORUER Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------------}{ HON. MARCY S. FRIEDMAN: The fi.;Hovving e-fHed documents, listed by NYSCEF docmnent number (Motion Seq. No. 017) 363,364,367,389,390,397 SEALING ORDER were read on this motion to/for Defendants TradingScreen Inc. (the Company), Pierre Schroeder, and Piero Grandi moved, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 216.l (a), for an order sealing the infom1ation set forth in Appendix A and B to their memorandum of law in support of the motion. At an initial appearance, the court indicated that the request for sealing was overbroad. (April 24, 2018 Tr., at 7.) In response, at the oral argument of the motion, defondants submitted a more narrovvl.y tailored sealing request in which they vvithdrew their claim that the sealing order should cover plaintiffs' allegat1ons as to defendants' vvTongfol conduct in causing the financial deterioration of the Company. (See May 15, 2018 Court's Ex. 1; May 15, 2018 Tr., at 36.) 1 of 8 [*FILED: 2] NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/17/2018 04:21 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 484 INDEX NO. 653624/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/17/2018 The court notes that \Vhen plaintiffs were represented by counsel they sought, and were granted, a sealing order protecting financial information similar to that which defendants seek to seaL (SY.~ April 20, 2017 Order [NYSCEF Doc. No, 171].) On the instant motion, plaintiffs submitted a pro se memorandum opposing defondants' request for sealing. At the oral argument of defendants' sealing motion, plaintiffs' then counsel agreed to sea.ling of financial statements and do11ar amounts but objected to defondants' other requests for sealing of information. (May 15, 2018 Tr., at 38.) Given the proprietary and confidential nature of the business information sought to be sealed, the court holds that good cause exists for sealing the documents and/or information identified in Appendix A and B, as fanited by Court's Exhibit 1, which 1s annexed. Specifically, defendants may seal the documents and/or information which fall within the categories listed in Court's Exhibit 1, but may not seal plaintiffs' allegations as to defendants' vvTongfol conduct in causing the financial deterioration of the Company. QRPER The documents identified in Appendix A that defendants request be sealed in their entirety were not filed on thee-filing system. Instead, in place of each document, a slipsheet was filed----i.e., a temporary placeholder that states "Not Publicly Filed[,] Contains Private and Confidential Information." (See e.g. NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 50, 53, 76, 77.) One of the documents identified in Appendix A, NYSCEF document number 252, consists of one unredacted exhibit and five sI.ipsheets, representing five of the six exhibits to the affirmation of Daniel S. Goldstein (plaintiffs' fom1er counsel), dated October 26, 2017. Defendants request sealing in their entirety only of those five exhibits and not of the one unredacted exhibit Page 2 of7 653624/2016 BUHANN!C v TRADINGSCR.EEN INC. Motion Seq. No. 017 2 of 8 [*FILED: 3] NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/17/2018 04:21 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 484 INDEX NO. 653624/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/17/2018 On this motion, defondants did not provide the court with any of the unredacted versions of the documents that they seek to seal in their entirety, The documents identified in Appendix A that defendants request be sealed in part were only filed on thee-filing system in redacted form. (S_~-~ e.g. NYSCEF Doc. Nos, 70, 71, 83, 106.) The unredacted versions of these documents were not provided to the court. on this motion. Moreover, several of these documents were filed with redaction ofinfonnation that was not authorized concerning Philippe Buhannic's removal as CEO of the Company. (See e.g. id.; April 20, 2017 Decision and Order.) The documents identified in Appendix B that defendants request be sealed, in whole or in part, \Vere filed by plaintiff on thee-filing system in umedacted fonn. (See e.g. NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 317, 318, 319, 323.) Defendants timely requested that these documents be sealed and that redacted versions of these documents be filed. \Vhile defendants have identified the categories of information that they request be redacted, defendants have not filed redacted versions of the documents. In addition, defendants have failed to submit a revised appendix which describes the documents and information that fall with.in the categories set forth in Court's Exhibit 1 and which the court has authorized to he redacted. \Vhi!e the court has found good cause to seal the categories of documents and info mmti on in Court's Exhibit 1, there must be a record of any d0Clm1ent or statement 'Within a document that is pem1itted to be sealed" It is accordingly hereby ORDERED: L For the documents identified in Appendix A (other than NYSCEF document number 252) to be seakd in their entirety: 653624/2016 BUHAN!ll!C Motion Seq. No, 017 Page 3 of 7 v TRADlNGSCREEN !NC. 3 of 8 [*FILED: 4] NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/17/2018 04:21 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 484 INDEX NO. 653624/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/17/2018 a. Defendants shall replace the slipsheets previously filed as NYSCEF docurnent numbers 50, 53, 59, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 85, 86, 87, 89, 98, 103, 105, 107, 109, 110, 119, 131, 133, 134, 135, 140,231,232,233,243,256,257,258,259,260,261,262,263,264,265, 266, and 267 with unredacted versions of the documents; and b. Defendants shall file a revised Appendix A setting forth the following infommtion for each document: (1) the NYSCEF document number of the document to be sealed; and (2) the category or categories in Court's Exhibit 1 applicable to the sealed document; and c. Upon service of a copy of this order, together with the revised Appendix A, upon the Clerk of the Court, the Clerk shall seal the documents filed as the NYSCEF document numbers set forth in sub-paraf,rraph I (a) above. Until further order of the court, the Clerk of the Court shall deny access to these documents to anyone other than the staff of the Clerk or the court, counsel of record for any party to this case, and any party, Provided that: The Clerk of the Court shaH not seaI any document numbers not listed in defondants' revised Appendix A, and II. For NYSCEF document number 252: a. Defendants shall file an umedacted version of NYSCEF document number 252 - i.e., defendants shall file the unredacted document previously filed and the five documents previously represented by slipsheets; and b. Defendants shall file a revised Appendix A setting forth the following information for NYSCEF document nurnber 252: ( 1) the NYSCEF document number for the unredacted version to be sealed; and (2) the category or categories in Court's Exhibit I applicable to the document or information to be sealed; and 65362412016 BUHANN!C Motion Seq. No, 017 Page 4 of 7 v TRADiNGSCREEN INC. 4 of 8 [*FILED: 5] NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/17/2018 04:21 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 484 INDEX NO. 653624/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/17/2018 c. Upon service of a copy of this order, together with the revised Appendix A, upon the Clerk of the Court, the Clerk shall seal the unredacted version of the docmnent previously filed as NYSCEF document number 252. Until further order of the court, the Clerk of the Court shaU deny access to this document to anyone other than the staff of the Clerk or the court, counsel of record for any pmiy to this case, and any party; and HL For the documents identified in Appendix A to be sealed only in pmi: a. Defondants shall file an unredacted version of each of the redacted documents previously filed as NYSCEF document numbers 56, 57, 58, 62, 70, 71, 83, 84, 100, 102, 104, 106, 108, 115, 118, 121, 124, 127, 129, 130, 132, 141, 215, 236, 242, 245, 249, 250, 254, 255, and 360; and b. Previously filed documents that redacted information concerning Philippe Buhannic's removal as CEO of the Compm1y shall be re-filed 'without redaction of such information; and c. Defendants shal] file a revised Appendix A setting forth the following information for each document (1) the NYSCEF document number for the unredacted version to be sealed; (2) the NYSCEF document nmnber for the previously filed redacted version; (3) if applicable, the NYSCEF document number for any re-filed redacted version, and (4) the category or categories in Court's Exhibit 1 applicable to the document or infonnation to be sealed; and d. Upon service of a copy ofthis order, together with the revised Appendix A, upon the Clerk of the Court, the Clerk shall seal the unredacted version of each of the doc1.ll11ents previously filed as the NYSCEF document nmnbers set forth in sub-paragraph III (a) above. lJntil further order of the court, the Clerk of the Court shail deny access to these doc1.ll11ents to Page 5 of7 65362412016 BUHANNIC v TRADlNGSCREEN lNC. Motion Seq. No. 017 5 of 8 [*FILED: 6] NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/17/2018 04:21 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 484 INDEX NO. 653624/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/17/2018 anyone other than the staff of the Clerk or the court, counsel of record for any party to this case, and any party. Provided that: The Clerk of the Court shall not seal any docmnent numbers not listed in defondants' revised Appendix. A; and IV. For the documents identified in Appendix B: a. Defendants shall file redacted versions ofNYSCEF document numbers 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 323, 324, 326, 327, 339, 340, 332, 337, 338, and 343, which shaU redact solely the infonnation authorized to be sealed by the A. pril 20, 2017 order or this order; and b. Defendants shall file a revised Appendix B setting forth the following information for each docmnent: (1) the NYSCEF document number for the previously filed unredacted version to be sealed; (2) the NYSCEF document number for the redacted version; and (3) the category or categories in Court's Exhibit 1 applicable to the sealed document; and c. Upon service of a copy of this order, together with the revised Appendix B, upon the Clerk of the Clerk, the Clerk shall seal the previously filed unredacted version of each document filed as the NYSCEF document numbers set forth in sub-paragraph IV (a) above. Until further order of the court, the Clerk of the Court shaH deny access to these documents to anyone other than the staff of the Clerk or the court, counsel of record for any party to this case, and any party. Provided that: The Clerk of the Court shall not seal any document numbers not listed in defendants' revised Appendix B; and V. Future sub1nissions containing or referencing the confidential information specified in this decision shall be redacted prior to public filing on NYSCEF; and Page 6 of7 65362412016 BUHANNIC v TRAOlNGSCREEN lNC. Motion Seq. No. 017 6 of 8 [*FILED: 7] NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/17/2018 04:21 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 484 INDEX NO. 653624/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/17/2018 VL This order may not be used to seal or redact any documents or evidence to be offered at trial. This constitutes the decision and order of the court. '"""""""""!.~i!_!.l_~Q-~-~-------------····· DATE CHECK ONE: § CASE DISPOSED ; Af'PUCATiON: CHECK IF APPROPRIATE: i ! GRANTED D DENIED SETILE ORDER I INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN i~~ Page 7 of 7 65362412016 BUHANNIC v TRADINGSCREEN INC. Motion Seq. No. 017 7 of 8

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.