We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 11-20 of 48

Common-interest privilege confirmed in the garden state
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • August 4 2014

The Supreme Court of New Jersey unanimously endorsed broad protections for the common-interest privilege in O'Boyle v. Borough of Longport. There


The perils of consent
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • May 31 2011

The Sixth Circuit held that a suspected marijuana grower's consent to a search of his residence for "other material or records pertaining to narcotics" allowed the police to search a thumb drive connected to his laptop, on which they found child pornography


Lifting the veil of secrecy
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • October 31 2011

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder wrote the chair of the Advisory Committee on the Criminal Rules, recommending an amendment to Rule 6(e), which governs the secrecy of grand-jury materials


McGeoghean v. McGeoghean
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • August 15 2011

In McGeoghean v. McGeoghean, Case No. 10-P-407, 2011 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 936 (Aug. 3, 2011), a decision issued pursuant to Rule 1:28, the Appeals Court affirmed the superior court's judgment in all respects


It's a bird! It's a plane! It's an attorney-client waiver opinion!
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • May 1 2012

Privileged documents produced in response to a grand-jury subpoena cannot be withheld in subsequent civil litigation (even litigation about Superman), according to this opinion from the Ninth Circuit


Employer's law blog - court orders production of notes prepared by plaintiff, not on request from counsel
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • April 26 2012

The New Jersey Appellate Division recently held that handwritten notes prepared by a plaintiff before she met with her attorney are not protected by the attorney-client privilege and must be produced in discovery, where the notes were not prepared at the attorney’s direction or under his supervision


Sherman v. Shub
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • August 29 2011

In Sherman v. Shub, Case No. SUCV2007-BLS1, 2011 Mass. Super. LEXIS 146 (Suffolk Super. Ct. June 16, 2011), a Superior Court decision that was issued in June but just recently reported, the Court entered summary judgment against the plaintiffs on their Chapter 93A claim against the defendant insurance advisers and attorneys relating to allegedly defective estate plans


Mannix v. Tighe, Hutchings v. City of Gardner, and Marmer v. Kaufman
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • March 17 2010

Three recently reported decisions -- two of the superior court -- are worth noting briefly


10 tips for outsourcing document reviews to offshore vendors
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • May 3 2010

Legal departments are increasingly using contract attorneys to conduct document reviews during discovery


New York Supreme Court issues a defense verdict for Day Pitney client
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • May 3 2010

On July 29, 2009, Supreme Court Judge Nicholas Colabella of the New York Supreme Court in Westchester County issued a defense verdict for our client, Volkswagen Group of America, in a wrongful death case that had been pending since 1997