Anonymous - Page 4

                                         -4-                                          
          594, 596 (7th Cir. 1978); Willie Nelson Music Co. v.                        
          Commissioner, supra at 920; Tavano v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.              
          1991-237, affd. 986 F.2d 1389 (11th Cir. 1993).  To determine               
          whether sealing the record is appropriate, we must weigh the                
          presumption, however gauged, in favor of public access to                   
          judicial records against the interests advanced by the parties.             
          Nixon v. Warner Commcns., Inc., supra at 602; AT&T Co. v. Grady,            
          supra at 598; Willie Nelson Music Co. v. Commissioner, supra at             
          919.                                                                        
               Taxpayers seeking to seal court records must come forward              
          with appropriate testimony and factual data to show good cause.             
          Estate of Yaeger v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 180, 189 (1989); Willie           
          Nelson Music Co. v. Commissioner, supra at 920 (citing Wyatt v.             
          Kaplan, 686 F.2d 276, 283 (5th Cir. 1982); United States v.                 
          United Fruit Co., 410 F.2d 553, 557 n.11 (5th Cir. 1969)); Tavano           
          v. Commissioner, supra.  Taxpayers may not rely on conclusory or            
          unsupported statements to establish claims of harm that would               
          result from disclosure.  Willie Nelson Music Co. v. Commissioner,           
          supra at 920; In re Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings in Petroleum           
          Prods. Antitrust Litig., supra at 44.                                       
               Good cause has been demonstrated and records sealed where              
          patents, trade secrets, or confidential information are involved            
          or where an individual’s business reputation will be hurt.  See             
          In re Smith, 656 F.2d 1101 (5th Cir. 1981) (striking an                     
          individual’s name from factual resumes on due process grounds as            
          resumes were prepared in criminal proceeding where the individual           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011