John Blair Communications, Inc. v. Reliance Capital Group, L.P.
| Decision Date | 28 April 1992 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
| Parties | JOHN BLAIR COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. RELIANCE CAPITAL GROUP, L.P., et al., Defendants-Appellants, and Touche Ross & Co., Defendant. TELEMUNDO GROUP, INC., Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant , v. JHR ACQUISITION CORP., Third Party Defendant-Respondent. |
Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and CARRO, KUPFERMAN and KASSAL, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered October 29, 1991, which denied defendants' motion to compel disclosure and granted plaintiffs' cross-motion for a protective order, unanimously modified, on plaintiffs' concession, to grant the motion and deny the cross-motion as to documents identified as "draft complaint concerning Divorce Court" and "letter from Wechsler to Peat Marwick", and otherwise affirmed, with costs.
Defendants seek disclosure of material claimed by plaintiffs to be protected by the attorney-client and/or work product privilege. Although the burden of satisfying each element of the privilege rests on the party asserting it (Matter of Priest v. Hennessy, 51 N.Y.2d 62, 69, 431 N.Y.S.2d 511, 409 N.E.2d 983), it has been noted that, "as a practical matter", some information fits within the attorney-related privileges by its nature (Matter of Estate of Baker, 139 Misc.2d 573, 576, 528 N.Y.S.2d 470). Such is the case here, where virtually every item sought consists of draft pleadings, communications or advice in connection with those pleadings, advice of counsel in connection with the corporate acquisition that is the subject of the action, or work product for which plaintiffs submitted an affirmation of counsel showing that the information was generated by plaintiffs' attorneys solely for the purpose of the litigation (see Warren v. New York City Tr. Auth., 34 A.D.2d 749, 310 N.Y.S.2d 277).
It is also the burden of the proponent of the privilege to prove non-waiver (Mfrs. & Traders Trust Co. v. Servotronics, Inc., 132 A.D.2d 392, 398-399, 522 N.Y.S.2d 999). We agree with the IAS Court's finding that plaintiffs satisfied that burden by showing: (1) production of the documents in question was inadvertent, (2) an intention to retain the confidentiality of privileged materials, (3) reasonable precautions to prevent disclosure, (4) a prompt objection, (5) an absence of prejudice to defendants were a protective order to be granted (id. 132 A.D.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
STATE EX REL. ALLSTATE INS. v. Gaughan
...v. Department of Revenue of State of Montana., 254 Mont. 387, 838 P.2d 914 (Mont.1992); John Blair Communications, Inc. v. Reliance Capital Group, L.P., 182 A.D.2d 578, 582 N.Y.S.2d 720 (1992); Hartman v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 107 N.M. 679, 763 P.2d 1144 (N.M.1988); Sterling v. Keidan, 1......
-
Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London
...question of whether there was waiver of the privilege by the "inadvertent" disclosure (see John Blair Communications v. Reliance Capital Group, 182 A.D.2d 578, 579, 582 N.Y.S.2d 720 [1st Dept.1995] ). The only question for decision is whether the London Reinsurers have established that the ......
-
Charlestown Capital Advisors, LLC v. Acero Junction, Inc.
..."It is also the burden of the proponent of the privilege to prove non-waiver." John Blair Commc'ns, Inc. v. Reliance Capital Grp., L.P., 182 A.D.2d 578, 579, 582 N.Y.S.2d 720, 721 (1st Dep't 1992). The privilege is waived if "the client voluntarily discloses the communications to another pa......
-
Subafilms, Ltd. v. MGM-Pathe Communications Co.
...Again, the burden of satisfying each element of the privilege falls on the proponent. See John Blair Communications v. Reliance Capital Group, L.P., 582 N.Y.S.2d 720, 721 (App.Div.1992). Under California law, lawyer-client communications are presumed to be confidential. Cal.Evid. Code § 917......
-
Privilege
...privilege by their nature and were therefore protected from discovery. John Blair Communications, Inc. v. Reliance Capital Group , 582 N.Y.S.2d 720 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept. 1992). But although the prospect of litigation may be relevant to the subject 9-15 Privilege §9.501 PRIVILEGE communications,......
-
Privilege
...privilege by their nature and were therefore protected from discovery. John Blair Communications, Inc. v. Reliance Capital Group , 582 N.Y.S.2d 720 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept. 1992). But although the prospect of litigation may be relevant to the subject communications, the protection from disclosure ......
-
Privilege
...privilege by their nature and were therefore protected from discovery. John Blair Communications, Inc. v. Reliance Capital Group , 582 N.Y.S.2d 720 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept. 1992). But although the prospect of litigation may be relevant to the subject communications, the protection from disclosure ......
-
Privilege
...privilege by their nature and were therefore protected from discovery. John Blair Communications, Inc. v. Reliance Capital Group , 582 N.Y.S.2d 720 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept. 1992). But although the prospect of litigation may be relevant to the subject communications, the protection from disclosure ......