District Court, S.D. New York, 2025

Frank Brunckhorst III, individually and in his capacity as trustee of The Frank...

Frank Brunckhorst III, individually and in his capacity as trustee of The Frank...
District Court, S.D. New York · Decided November 19, 2025
Frank Brunckhorst III, individually and in his capacity as trustee of The Frank...

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : FRANK BRUNCKHORST III, individually and in his : capacity as trustee of THE FRANK BRUNCKHORST III : 2001 TRUST, : : 21 Civ. 4362 (JPC) Plaintiff, : : -v- : ORDER : ERIC BISCHOFF et al., : : Defendants. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : ERIC BISCHOFF, : : Counterclaim-Plaintiff, : : -v- : : FRANK BRUNCKHORST III, individually and in his : capacity as trustee of THE FRANK BRUNCKHORST III : 2001 TRUST, : : Counterclaim-Defendant. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : ERIC BISCHOFF, : : Crossclaim-Plaintiff, : : -v- : : SUSAN STRAVITZ KEMP, in her capacity as co-trustee : of THE BARBARA BRUNCKHORST 1994 TRUST and : executrix of THE ESTATE OF BARBARA : BRUNCKHORST et al., : : Crossclaim-Defendants. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X JOHN P. CRONAN, United States District Judge: On November 3, 2025, the Court invited the parties to propose redactions to six documents it intended to unseal because they were central to its adjudication of the parties’ summary judgment motions. Dkt. 589 (“Redaction Order’) at 9. The Trustees, without objection from Frank and Eric, now move to redact limited excerpts from five of those documents: the Barbara 2010 Trust Agreement, Dkt. 520-2; the Irrevocability Agreement, Dkt. 520-3; the Death Appointment, Dkt. 520-4; the Income Assignment, Dkt. 520-5; and the Firm Memo, Dkt. 520-6. See Dkt. 593.

After reviewing those redactions, and for the reasons previously articulated during this litigation, see Redaction Order, the Court determines that the requested redactions are warranted under Lugosch vy. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006), and its progeny. Therefore, the Court will unseal those documents with the redactions attached as exhibits to the Trustees’ motion. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Docket Number 593.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 19, 2025 Vihar hin ® 7B New York, New York JOHN P. CRONAN United States District Judge ' Tn addition, the Court will redact page 2 of the Income Assignment, Dkt. 520-5, below the word “Accepted,” consistent with the Trustees’ other proposed redactions.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.