Narrative Opinion Summary
Gulliver Schools, Inc. and School Management Systems, Inc.’s Amended Motion to File Briefs and Appendices Under Seal has been deemed facially insufficient and is therefore denied. The denial is without prejudice, allowing the parties the opportunity to submit a revised motion that meets the sealing criteria established in Barron v. Fla. Freedom Newspapers, 531 So.2d 113 (Fla. 1988), as well as in accordance with Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420 and the case of BDO Seidman, LLP v. Banco Espirito Santo Int% Ltd. So.3d. Fla. 3d DCA 2009.
Legal Issues Addressed
Opportunity for Revised Motionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The parties were granted the opportunity to submit a revised motion that adheres to specific sealing criteria outlined by precedent and procedural rules.
Reasoning: The denial is without prejudice, allowing the parties the opportunity to submit a revised motion that meets the sealing criteria established in Barron v. Fla. Freedom Newspapers, 531 So.2d 113 (Fla. 1988), as well as in accordance with Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420 and the case of BDO Seidman, LLP v. Banco Espirito Santo Int% Ltd. So.3d. Fla. 3d DCA 2009.
Sealing of Court Documentssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denied the motion to file briefs and appendices under seal due to facial insufficiency, indicating the necessity for compliance with established sealing criteria.
Reasoning: Gulliver Schools, Inc. and School Management Systems, Inc.’s Amended Motion to File Briefs and Appendices Under Seal has been deemed facially insufficient and is therefore denied.