Brown v. Henderson County Sheriff's Office et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
1:23-cv-00270-MR-WCM
MACKENZIE ELAINE BROWN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) ORDER
v. )
)
HENDERSON COUNTY )
SHERIFF’S OFFICE; )
ROBERT JORDAN WARREN, )
Sheriff Deputy with Henderson )
County Sheriff's Office - Patrol Division; )
MICHAEL SCOTT LINDSAY , )
Sheriff Deputy with Henderson County )
Sheriff's Office - Patrol Division; )
CRYSTAL D. LANDERS, )
Sheriff Deputy with Henderson County )
Sheriff's Office - Patrol Division; )
JOHNNY E. DUNCAN, JR. )
Henderson County Director of )
Technical Services/Public )
Information Officer; )
BRADLEY R. REESE, )
Animal Enforcement Officer with )
Henderson County Sheriff's Department; )
BRITTANY NICOLE MAYBIN, )
Detention Facility Officer with )
Henderson County Detention Facility; )
SUSAN N. OATES, )
Magistrate with North Carolina )
Administrative Office of the Courts; and )
EMILY GREENE COWAN, )
District Court Judge with the )
North Carolina Consolidated )
Judicial Retirement System, )
)
Defendants. )
Case 1:23-cv-00270-MR Document 51 Filed 10/28/24 Page 1 of 3

2
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal Exhibits
from Doc. 43-2 (the “Motion,” Doc. 48). Specifically, Plaintiff, who is proceeding
pro se, seeks an order sealing Exhibits 5 and 8 to her Response in Opposition
to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. 43).
Exhibit 5 is a state warrant for Plaintiff’s arrest (the “Arrest Warrant,”
Doc. 43-2 at 11–13). Exhibit 8 is a Public Defender’s Fee Application (the “Fee
Application,” Doc. 43-2 at 19–20).
Defendants the Henderson County Sheriff’s Office, Robert Jordan
Warren, Michael Scott Lindsay, Crystal D. Landers, Johnny E. Duncan, Jr.,
Bradley R. Reese, and Brittany Nicole Maybin do not oppose the Motion. Doc.
49.
As Exhibits 5 and 8 contain Plaintiff’s personal information, they should
be sealed and redacted versions should be filed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a); see also
Administrative Procedures Governing Filing and Service By Electronic Means
(available on the court’s website).
Logistically, however, the sealing of these documents is somewhat
complicated, as the original exhibits to Plaintiff’s Response have been filed as
one attachment, rather than as individual attachments.
Case 1:23-cv-00270-MR Document 51 Filed 10/28/24 Page 2 of 3

3
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal Exhibits from Doc. 43-2 (Doc. 48) is
GRANTED, and Doc. 43-2 is SEALED until further order of the
Court.
2. Plaintiff is DIRECTED to file, on or before November 12, 2024,
additional copies of the exhibits to Doc. 43. Specifically, she shall
file an index to which each exhibit is attached as a separate
document. Exhibits 5 and 8 shall be redacted versions of the Arrest
Warrant and Fee Application from which Plaintiff’s personal
information has been removed.
Signed: October 28, 2024
Case 1:23-cv-00270-MR Document 51 Filed 10/28/24 Page 3 of 3