Upjohn Co. v. United States
449 U.S. 383 (1981) Cited 4,229 times 130 Legal AnalysesHolding that communications between corporate counsel and a corporation's employees made for the purpose of rendering legal advice are protected by the attorney-client privilege
Shelton v. Am. Motors Corp.
805 F.2d 1323 (8th Cir. 1986) Cited 716 times 9 Legal AnalysesHolding that an attempt to depose an attorney about documents her client possessed was protected by the work product privilege, as this knowledge would reflect her judgment as an attorney in identifying, examining, and selecting from her client's voluminous files those documents on which she relied in preparing her client's defense
In re Subpoena Issued to Dennis Friedman
350 F.3d 65 (2d Cir. 2003) Cited 232 timesRejecting the Shelton rule and instead applying a "flexible approach" that "takes into consideration all of the relevant facts and circumstances" including "the need to depose the lawyer, the lawyer's role in connection with the matter on which discovery is sought and in relation to the pending litigation, the risk of encountering privilege and work-product issues, and the extent of discovery already conducted"
Dove v. Atlantic Capital Corp.
963 F.2d 15 (2d Cir. 1992) Cited 253 timesHolding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a protective order to prevent discovery material obtained by a debtor in a collection action from being used in related litigation in another country in which the debtor claimed that an individual negotiated high risk loans on behalf of debtor
In re Steinhardt Partners, L.P.
9 F.3d 230 (2d Cir. 1993) Cited 240 times 4 Legal AnalysesHolding that voluntary production of privileged documents to an adversary waives privilege
Texaco Inc. v. Pennzoil Co.
784 F.2d 1133 (2d Cir. 1986) Cited 168 timesHolding that a judgment-creditor's use of post-judgment attachment was state action
Litton Sys., Inc. v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co.
700 F.2d 785 (2d Cir. 1983) Cited 172 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding filed rate doctrine is inapplicable where court is not called upon to even indirectly determine what reasonable rate would have been
U.S. v. Yonkers Bd. of Educ
946 F.2d 180 (2d Cir. 1991) Cited 96 timesHolding that the trial judge's comments in an interview did not require him to recuse himself because "he only restated what he had been saying in open court for the past few years and did not discuss the details of remedy implementation"
Sea Tow Intern., Inc. v. Pontin
246 F.R.D. 421 (E.D.N.Y. 2007) Cited 45 timesRejecting party's request to depose opposing counsel and finding "much, if not all, of the information defendants claim to be seeking can be acquired from [the defendant] himself and/or representatives of [the plaintiff]"
Astra Aktiebolag v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
208 F.R.D. 92 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) Cited 45 times 3 Legal AnalysesAffording confidentiality to communications between a company's employees and in-house counsel containing copies of the outside counsel's communications “providing legal opinions and conveying legal advice.”
Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 Cited 95,946 times 660 Legal AnalysesAdopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37
Rule 30 - Depositions by Oral Examination
Fed. R. Civ. P. 30 Cited 16,229 times 128 Legal AnalysesUpholding a district court's decision not to consider the plaintiff's deposition errata sheets in opposition to a motion for summary judgment when they were untimely
Section 1261 - Definitions
15 U.S.C. § 1261 Cited 249 times 3 Legal AnalysesDefining "hazardous substance" as one that is "flammable or combustible," among other qualifying characteristics
Section 2064 - Substantial product hazards
15 U.S.C. § 2064 Cited 116 times 18 Legal AnalysesDefining “substantial product hazard” to be a product that either fails to comply with an applicable safety standard or contains a product defect