The Fourth Circuit has clarified the standard for evaluating a nonparty’s attempt to access sealed summary judgment filings under the First Amendment. In United States ex rel. Oberg v. Nelnet, Inc., — F.4th –, No. 23-1808, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 14786 (4th Cir. June 18, 2024) (Op.), the Fourth Circuit examined a nonparty’s ability to obtain documents filed under seal in connection with dispositive summary judgment motions. The Fourth Circuit concluded that “irrespective of whether a district court ever resolves a summary judgment motion, the public has a presumptive First Amendment right to access documents submitted in connection with it.” Op. at 18. But, the presumption is not insurmountable. Id.at 14 n.8. Parties seeking to maintain under seal documents filed in connection with summary judgment motions must show that continued sealing is necessitated by a compelling government interest, narrowly tailored to serve that interest. That the district court never ruled on the summary judgment motions or did not rely on the sealed material in resolving the motion is insufficient to overcome the First Amendment access presumption.
LA Kuykendall
Laura Anne (LA) counsels individuals and companies responding to allegations of regulatory and criminal wrongdoing and advises them in connection with navigating these high-stakes matters throughout the investigatory, enforcement, and litigation process.
Do Not Bet on Block Billing Just Yet
In Colonial River Wealth Advisors, LLC v. Cambridge Investment Research, Inc., No. 3:22cv717, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3058 (E.D. Va. Jan. 5, 2024), Judge Young granted the prevailing defendant’s fee petition, awarded $227,357 in attorneys’ fees, and concluded that block billing records provided by the defendant’s counsel “sufficiently permit[ed] the Court to assess the hours expended and the nature of the work completed.” Judge Young rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the block billing practices made it impossible to determine which attorneys’ fees were reasonable. Judge Young acknowledged that, though no per se rule against block billing exists, “in some instances, block billing may inhibit a court from accurately assessing the reasonableness of a fee request,” where lumped fee entries lacked sufficient detail and obscured the amount of time actually spent on the billed-for tasks. When block billing prevents the assessment of the reasonableness of the fees, a reduction of the fee award is appropriate. But in the case of the defendant’s fee petition, Judge Young was able to assess the reasonableness of the fee request, given the level of detail in the defendant’s counsel’s time entry descriptions. Using one example, the court noted that one 8.3 hour entry encompassed 11 discrete tasks, including review of a 309-page deposition transcript, the document production of another party, documents for use in upcoming deposition, and motion to quash various subpoenas. The court found it not unreasonable for the defendant’s counsel to have spent 8.3 hours on those tasks.
Richmond FBA Hosts Judge Payne at Lunch and Learn Event
On December 5, the Richmond Division of the Federal Bar Association hosted a Lunch and Learn panel for chapter members, area practitioners, and a special guest — the Honorable Robert E. Payne. The panel, titled “Procedural Pitfalls for Civil Practitioners in the Eastern District of Virginia: Insights from Senior Judge Robert E Payne,” was co-moderated by Tim St. George, a former Richmond Division chapter president and law clerk to Judge Payne, and David Anthony. Tim and David, both partners at Troutman Pepper, have special experience handling cases in the E.D. Va. and understand the unique rules, risks, and pitfalls for litigants practicing in this division.
Richmond FBA Welcomes New Magistrate Judge with Lunch and Learn Event
On June 12, the Richmond Division of the Federal Bar Association hosted a Lunch and Learn panel for chapter members, area practitioners, and special guests — the Honorable Mark R. Colombell and the Honorable Summer L. Speight, the Richmond Division’s newest magistrate judge sworn in earlier this year. With her appointment, Judge Speight returns to the Richmond Division, having begun her legal career there as a law clerk for the Honorable M. Hannah Lauck. Before receiving her appointment as a magistrate judge, Judge Speight served as a partner with McGuireWoods LLP in Richmond, VA. There, she counseled and represented employers in all aspects of employment-related litigation, traditional labor law, employee benefits, and ERISA litigation.