You searched for: "In Camera Review"
Search Results
March 19, 2025
Court Faces “Catch-22 Problem” Of Whether To Order Production Of Privileged Documents To Plaintiff Claiming Legal Malpractice Where Disputes Remained Over Whether Plaintiff Was Actually Attorneys’ Client
On January 31, 2025, Justice Melissa A. Crane ordered in camera review of certain purportedly privileged documents in a legal malpractice case, noting that conflicting contentions over whether the plaintiff was ever actually a client of defendants presented a “catch-22 problem.” In Genesis Reoc Company LLC, et al. v. Stuart D. Poppel, et al., Index No. 156733/2017, the plaintiff alleged that the defendants were their former attorneys and sued for malpractice. The attorneys had represented other parties in the underlying transactions at issue, and during discovery, they withheld communications with those clients on the basis of privilege. The attorneys also contended that the plaintiff had never actually been a client of theirs. The Court ordered in camera review to address the threshold question of whether an attorney-client relationship existed, explaining: Read More
March 14, 2025
Court Orders In Camera Submission Of Assertedly Privileged Documents In Legal Malpractice Action To Resolve Threshold Question Of Attorney-Client Relationship
On January 31, 2025, Justice Melissa A. Crane resolved a motion to compel by directing in camera production of certain documents to inform a threshold inquiry as to whether or not plaintiffs and defendants had an attorney-client relationship. Genesis REOC, Company, LLC v. Poppel, Index No. 156733/2017. Read More
February 21, 2024
Court Grants In Camera Review of Documents Despite Referee’s Decision, Noting Review is Standard Practice in Commercial Division
On January 20, 2024, Justice Andrea Masley granted a motion requesting in camera review of documents even after a discovery referee had declined to perform an in camera review. The decision in CWCapital Cobalt VR Ltd. v. CWCapital Investments LLC, et al., Index No. 653277/2018, vacated the referee’s order and allowed for in camera review of 35 emails exchanged between lawyers and nonlawyers over which the defendants had claimed attorney-client privilege. In granting the motion, Justice Masley indicated that in camera review has become common practice in the Commercial Division. The Court explained: Read More
