Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
| Citation | 692 N.Y.S.2d 384 |
| Parties | The AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, etc., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S, et al., Defendants-Appellants. |
| Decision Date | 01 July 1999 |
Page 384
v.
CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S, et al., Defendants-Appellants.
Page 385
Joseph M. McLaughlin, for Plaintiff-Respondent.
Robert B. Robinson, for Defendants-Appellants.
ROSENBERGER, J.P., WILLIAMS, MAZZARELLI, LERNER and BUCKLEY, JJ.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J., pursuant to CPLR 9002, upon a decision by Lewis Friedman, J.), entered March 4, 1998, which to the extent appealed from, denied in part defendants' motion to compel plaintiff to return certain inadvertently produced documents; and order, same court (Barry Cozier, J.), entered June 15, 1998, which, to the extent appealed from and appealable, denied defendants' motion for renewal of their motion to compel, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The IAS court's partial denial of defendants' motion to compel the return of certain inadvertently produced documents was a proper exercise of its discretion (see, Eisic Trading Corp. v. Somerset Marine, Inc., 212 A.D.2d 451, 622 N.Y.S.2d 728). Defendants did not meet their burden of demonstrating that the minutes of the Environmental Claims Reinsurance Group are entitled to the protection of the attorney-client privilege (CPLR 3101[b], 4503[a] ) since the communications contained in the minutes pertain in the main to commercial concerns and are not primarily or predominantly communications of a legal character (see, Spectrum Sys. Intl. Corp. v. Chemical Bank, 78 N.Y.2d 371, 378-379, 575 N.Y.S.2d 809, 581 N.E.2d 1055; Rossi v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Greater New York, 73 N.Y.2d 588, 594, 542 N.Y.S.2d 508, 540 N.E.2d 703). Nor have defendants shown that the subject communications were made with the intent or expectation that they would remain confidential (see, Eisic Trading Corp., 212 A.D.2d supra, at 451, 622 N.Y.S.2d 728).
Page 386
Also properly found by the IAS court to be without the attorney-client privilege was defendants' inadvertently disclosed list of potential interviewees (see, Bloss v. Ford Motor Co., 126 A.D.2d 804, 510 N.Y.S.2d 304). We agree as well with the IAS court's further determination that neither the aforementioned minutes nor the interviewee list were entitled to protection as attorney work product (CPLR 3101[c] ) since they were not "uniquely the product[s] of a lawyer's learning and...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
AMBAC Assurance Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
...Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, 176 Misc.2d 605, 676 N.Y.S.2d 727 [Sup.Ct., N.Y. County 1998], affd. 263 A.D.2d 367, 692 N.Y.S.2d 384 [1st Dept.1999] ). The Referee concluded that “[i]f there is such litigation and a common legal interest then the common-interest doctrine co......
-
Ambac Assurance Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
...Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, 176 Misc.2d 605, 676 N.Y.S.2d 727 [Sup.Ct., N.Y. County 1998], affd. 263 A.D.2d 367, 692 N.Y.S.2d 384 [1st Dept.1999] ). The Referee concluded that “[i]f there is such litigation and a common legal interest then the common-interest doctrine co......
-
Hyatt v. Cal. Franchise Tax Bd.
...( see Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, 176 Misc.2d 605, 611, 676 N.Y.S.2d 727,affd. 263 A.D.2d 367, 692 N.Y.S.2d 384;In re Quigley Co., 2009 Bankr. LEXIS 1352, *7–8 [Bkrtcy.S.D.N.Y.2009] ). To fall within that exception, the privileged communication must be ......
-
Ambac Assurance Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
...Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, 176 Misc.2d 605, 612–613, 676 N.Y.S.2d 727 [Sup.Ct., N.Y. County 1998], affd. 263 A.D.2d 367, 692 N.Y.S.2d 384 [1st Dept.1999], lv. dismissed 94 N.Y.2d 875, 705 N.Y.S.2d 6, 726 N.E.2d 483 [2000]; see also Allied Irish Banks, P.L.C. v. Bank of Am. N.A......