Tag: Privilege or Work Product Protections

1
United States v. Stewart, 294 F. Supp. 2d 490 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)
2
Felham Enter. (Cayman) Ltd. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, 2004 WL 2360159 (E.D. La. Oct. 19, 2004)
3
Portis v. City of Chicago, 2004 WL 1535854 (N.D. Ill. July 7, 2004)
4
In re Verisign, Inc. Sec. Litig., 2004 WL 2445243 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2004)
5
In re Gabapentin Patent Litig., 214 F.R.D. 178 (D.N.J. 2003)
6
Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG, 222 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)
7
Williams v. DuPont, 119 F.R.D. 648 (W.D. Ky. 1987)
8
In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated June 30, 2003, 770 N.Y.S.2d 568 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2003)
9
Santiago v. Miles, 121 F.R.D. 636 (W.D.N.Y. 1988)
10
Youle v. Ryan, 811 N.E.2d 1281 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004)

Felham Enter. (Cayman) Ltd. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, 2004 WL 2360159 (E.D. La. Oct. 19, 2004)

Key Insight: Where defendant did not timely object to document requests and belated privilege log was inadequate, court determined that attorney-client privilege and work product protection had been waived and ordered production

Nature of Case: Insurance coverage

Electronic Data Involved: Insurer’s computerized “Z-note” file contents related to particular claim

Portis v. City of Chicago, 2004 WL 1535854 (N.D. Ill. July 7, 2004)

Key Insight: Court granted motion to compel access to database constituting fact work product, where requesting party demonstrated (1) substantial need for the information and (2) undue hardship were it required to compile a similar database from scratch; however, requesting party would have to contribute its fair share toward the expenses incurred in compiling the database

Nature of Case: Class action for civil rights violations

Electronic Data Involved: Database compiled at direction of plaintiffs’ attorneys

Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG, 222 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)

Key Insight: Based on in camera review, court granted defendant’s motion to compel based on the crime/fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege, ordered production of other documents on same subject matter and further ruled that discovery would be allowed regarding documents produced and on the issue of sanctions

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Email, backup tapes

Williams v. DuPont, 119 F.R.D. 648 (W.D. Ky. 1987)

Key Insight: Employer entitled to discover, at its own expense, copies of database on computer disk, code books and user manual created by EEOC’s expert from information produced by employer to allow for effective cross-examination of EEOC’s expert; in addition, employer to pay “fair portion of the fees and expenses incurred” in the past by EEOC for the expert’s work in encoding the requested data and formulating the database

Nature of Case: Consolidated Title VII action brought by individual and EEOC

Electronic Data Involved: Database created by EEOC’s expert from information produced by employer

In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated June 30, 2003, 770 N.Y.S.2d 568 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2003)

Key Insight: DA’s application to compel witnesses to answer questions granted: attorney/client privilege did not preclude attorneys representing individuals connected to events surrounding homicide from answering questions about laptop that was instrumentality of crime

Nature of Case: Grand jury proceedings investigating homicide

Electronic Data Involved: Laptop

Santiago v. Miles, 121 F.R.D. 636 (W.D.N.Y. 1988)

Key Insight: Motion to compel production of computer printouts denied as to those constituting work product, granted as to those that were not prepared in anticipation of litigation

Nature of Case: Inmates sued for intentional discrimination in assignment of housing, programs, and administration of discipline

Electronic Data Involved: Computer printouts showing analysis of work locations and ethnicity of inmates

Youle v. Ryan, 811 N.E.2d 1281 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004)

Key Insight: Order compelling defendant surgeon to produce his surgical database, to include information related to all the cholecystectomy procedures defendant had ever performed (with the patient names redacted) was abuse of discretion; matter remanded with directions that the court examine the database contents in camera to determine relevance and privilege issues

Nature of Case: Medical malpractice

Electronic Data Involved: Surgical database maintained by defendant surgeon

Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.