PAYROW

v.

CHRONISTER

CHAD CHRONISTER, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Hillsborough County, and DAVID CLOUD, in his individual capacity,

Defendants. ________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING “DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO FILE EXHIBITS UNDER SEAL”

This matter is before the Court on “Defendants’ Motion to File Exhibits Under Seal.” (Doc. 54). Upon review of the motion, court file, and record, the Court finds as follows: Defendants request that certain exhibits they plan to file in connection with forthcoming summary judgment motions be filed under seal because they contain medical and mental health information relating to Plaintiff, including mental health evaluations, diagnoses, and treatment, that is confidential pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1301 et seq., and other applicable law. Courts have found that this type of information implicates a party’s legitimate privacy interests and can support filing under seal. See, e.g., Pena v. Marcus, No. 6:15-cv-69-Orl-18TBS, 2016 WL 10891560, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 4, 2016).

Upon review, and for good cause shown, the Court finds that the following items identified in Defendants’ motion may be filed under seal: Exhibit 4: Plaintiff’s Deposition Testimony from 2/17/23 in 8:22-CV-520 Exhibit 5: Composite Documents from 15-CF-13590A Exhibit 6: Armor/Naphcare Documents Exhibit 7: Gracepoint Documents Exhibit 12: HCSO Report 2013-27786 Exhibit 13: HCSO Report 2014-23797 Exhibit 14: Springfield Hospital Center Documents Exhibit 15: Plaintiff’s Interrogatory Answers Exhibit 17: St. Joseph’s Hospital Medical Documents Exhibit 19: HCFR Document Exhibit 22: HCSO Report 2014-215399 Exhibit 24: Filings from 2017-CF-17656A Exhibit 25: Forensic Psychological Evaluation by Dr. Gamache Exhibit 26: Forensic Psychological Evaluation by Dr. Iler Exhibit 28: HCSO UDF Powerpoint Exhibit 30: HCSO Report 13-433660 Exhibit 31: HCSO Report 12-41802

This Order is based on Defendants’ description of the items to be sealed. The Court notes, however, that filing information under seal is disfavored, and the Local Rules limit a party’s ability to file information under seal to “compelling” circumstances. See Local Rule 1.11; Verma v. Mem. Healthcare Group, Inc., No. 3:16-cv-427-J-25JRK, 2017 WL 8315889, at *1 (M.D. Fla. May 2, 2017). Accordingly, the Court may unseal materials if upon further review Court determines that sealing is inappropriate. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: 1. “Defendants Motion to File Exhibits Under Seal” (Doc. 54) is

GRANTED.

2. The Clerk is directed to accept for filing under seal the exhibits identified above, and to maintain these documents under seal. 3. Plaintiff, Plaintiff's attorneys, Defendants, and Defendants’ attorneys may retrieve or review sealed items to the extent necessary. 4. Absent a further order of the Court, the seal will remain in effect until 90 days after this case is closed and all appeals have been exhausted. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, on this 27‘» day of October, 2023.

yf / UY (Sf | | Py } A — I~! fhe

TOM BARBER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE