Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Wilk v. St. Vrain Valley School District

United States District Court, D. Colorado

November 18, 2015

ST. VRAIN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT, JOHN CREIGHTON, JOIE SIEGRIST, BOB SMITH, DEBBIE LAMMERS, JOHN AHRENS, PAULA PEAIRS, MIKE SCHIERS, members of the District’s Board, in their individual and official capacities, DON HADDAD, Superintendent of Schools, in his individual and official capacity, GREG WINGER, Expulsion Officer of the District, in his individual capacity, MATTHEW BUCHLER, Principal of Erie High School, in his individual capacity, TOWN OF ERIE POLICE DEPARTMENT, MARC VASQUEZ, Erie Police Department, in his individual and official capacity, DAN NIEMOTH, Erie Police Department, in his individual capacity, and AARON HADDOX, Erie Police Department, in his individual capacity, Defendants.

JOEL W. CANTRICK, P.C. Joel W. Cantrick Attorney for Plaintiffs

SENTER GOLDFARB & RICE, LLC Eric M. Ziporin Courtney B. Kramer Attorneys for Defendants St. Vrain Valley School District, Creighton, Siegrist, Smith, Lammers, Ahrens, Peairs, Schiers, Haddad, Winger and Buchler

LAW OFFICE OF LUKE W. McCONNELL, LLC Luke W. McConnell Attorney for Plaintiffs

NATHAN DUMM & MAYER P.C. Marni Nathan Kloster J. Andrew Nathan Nicholas C. Poppe Attorneys for the Erie Defendants


Richard P. Matsch United States Magistrate Judge

Each party and each counsel of record stipulate and move the Court for the entry of a Protective Order pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure concerning the treatment of Confidential Information, and, as grounds therefor, state as follows:

1. The nature of the claims, defenses, and damages asserted in this lawsuit involve discovery of documents and information containing Confidential Information (as defined in paragraph four below).

2. The purpose of this Protective Order is to preclude disclosure of Confidential Information to any person or entity not subject to this litigation as defined in this Protective Order. The disclosure of such information outside the scope of this litigation could result in significant injury to one or more of the parties’ business or privacy interests.

3. The parties have entered into this stipulation and request the Court to enter the within Protective Order for the purpose of preventing the disclosure and use of Confidential Information except as set forth herein, and prohibiting the parties from using or disclosing the Confidential Information for any purpose other than this litigation.

4. “Confidential Information” means any document, file, portions of files, recordings, deposition or transcribed testimony, or response to a discovery request, including any extract, abstract, chart, summary, note, or copy made therefrom, which contains information that is confidential and implicates common law and statutory privacy interests of the individuals who are named, and may include, but is not necessarily limited to, student files or information contained in student files[1], personnel files, medical records, other records that may pertain to any party or third-party, and/or documentation from underlying juvenile delinquency matters that have previously been expunged, which are not made available to the public, and as to which a reasonable expectation of privacy or confidentiality exists.

5. The disclosure of student files and related Confidential Information requires parental notification and may also require consent. Pursuant to the Family Education Rights & Privacy Act (“FERPA”), “personal information shall only be transferred to a third-party on the condition that such party will not permit any other party to have access to such information without the written consent of the parents of the student. If a third-party outside the educational agency or institution permits access to information in violation of paragraph (2)(A), or fails to destroy information in violation of paragraph (1)(F), the educational agency or institution shall be prohibited from permitting access to information from education records to that third-party for a period of not less than five years.” 20 U.S.C. § 1232g(4)(B).

6. Additionally, upon the entry of an expungement order, the person, agency and court may properly indicate that no record exists. Colo.Rev.Stat. § 19-1-306(1). Expungement is effectuated by physically sealing or conspicuously indicating on the face of the record or at the beginning of the computerized file of the record that said record has been designated as expunged. Colo.Rev.Stat. § 19-1-306(2)(b). Subsequently, records designated as expunged shall not be open to the public and may only be inspected by order of the court. Colo.Rev.Stat. § 19-1-306(3)-(4).

7. Information designated as confidential must first be reviewed by the attorney for the designating party, who must have a good faith belief that the information is confidential or otherwise entitled to protection under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c). Gillard v. Boulder Valley Sch. Dist., 196 F.R.D. 382, 386 (D. Colo. 2000).

8. When Confidential Information is produced, provided or otherwise disclosed by a Party in response to any discovery request, it will be ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.