This document has been electronically entered in the records of the ...
This document has been electronically entered in the records of the ...
This document has been electronically entered in the records of the ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Case 3:05-bk-38518 Doc 91 Filed 06/25/10 Entered 06/25/10 11:57:42 Desc Ma<strong>in</strong><br />
Document Page 10 <strong>of</strong> 20<br />
proper forum for determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g whe<strong>the</strong>r one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Ohio Rules for <strong>the</strong> Government <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Bar<br />
was violated, <strong>the</strong> court decl<strong>in</strong>es to f<strong>in</strong>d any abuse <strong>of</strong> process as asserted by Lassiter as part<br />
<strong>of</strong> his contempt allegations.<br />
C. Lassiter’s Request for an Order Seal<strong>in</strong>g or Redact<strong>in</strong>g References<br />
to <strong>the</strong> Letter Restricted From Public Access Is Denied<br />
In addition to request<strong>in</strong>g a contempt citation aga<strong>in</strong>st Moser, Lassiter <strong>has</strong> also asked<br />
that “all <strong>document</strong>s purport<strong>in</strong>g to cite, quote, or o<strong>the</strong>rwise refer to <strong>the</strong> sealed <strong>document</strong><br />
filed <strong>in</strong> this Court be sealed or appropriately redacted. Such <strong>document</strong>s <strong>in</strong>clude: this motion,<br />
replies and related fil<strong>in</strong>gs.” Contempt Motion, p. 11. The request is denied.<br />
The court detailed its ability to issue orders protect<strong>in</strong>g parties from filed <strong>document</strong>s<br />
and <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> those <strong>document</strong>s <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> § 107 Decision. The § 107 Decision is <strong>in</strong>corporated<br />
by reference. Certa<strong>in</strong> pr<strong>in</strong>ciples set forth <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> § 107 Decision are appropriate to repeat <strong>in</strong><br />
this Decision <strong>in</strong> response to Lassiter’s request for a protective order. First, <strong>the</strong> general rule is<br />
that <strong>records</strong> filed with a bankruptcy court are to be open to <strong>the</strong> public for <strong>in</strong>spection and<br />
copy<strong>in</strong>g. See § 107 Decision, pp. 13‐14. Only when an extraord<strong>in</strong>ary circumstance or a<br />
compell<strong>in</strong>g need is present is <strong>the</strong> public’s access to <strong>document</strong>s filed with <strong>the</strong> court to be<br />
restricted. Id. Second, matters that are relevant to <strong>the</strong> contested matter generally are not<br />
restricted from public access even if <strong>the</strong>y are <strong>of</strong>fensive to <strong>the</strong> movant. § 107 Decision, p. 19.<br />
Lassiter requested that <strong>the</strong> court f<strong>in</strong>d Moser <strong>in</strong> contempt for referenc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong><br />
Restricted Letter and issue an order restrict<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> public’s access to references to <strong>the</strong><br />
letter. Redact<strong>in</strong>g or o<strong>the</strong>rwise remov<strong>in</strong>g that reference from <strong>the</strong> public record will prevent<br />
<strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> adjudicat<strong>in</strong>g lawyer grievances filed <strong>in</strong> Ohio, such as grievance committees, boards, and counsel.<br />
See Ohio Rules for <strong>the</strong> Government <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Bar, Rule V, Section 11 (E)(1) and (2)(c).<br />
10