Commerzbank AG v. Bank of New York Mellon, 15-CV-10029 (GBD) (BCM). (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. New York
Number: infdco20191224685
Visitors: 11
Filed: Dec. 20, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 20, 2019
Summary: ORDER BARBARA MOSES , Magistrate Judge . Defendants' challenge to certain of plaintiff's privilege designations (Dkt. No. 167) is resolved as follows: The documents logged at Entries 13, 14, 22, 345, and 743 were properly withheld or redacted. The email logged at Entry 285 1 should be produced in redacted form rather than withheld entirely. The cover email from "Matt" to "Vijay" is not privileged. However, plaintiff may redact, as privileged, all text below the dotted line on page 1, exc
Summary: ORDER BARBARA MOSES , Magistrate Judge . Defendants' challenge to certain of plaintiff's privilege designations (Dkt. No. 167) is resolved as follows: The documents logged at Entries 13, 14, 22, 345, and 743 were properly withheld or redacted. The email logged at Entry 285 1 should be produced in redacted form rather than withheld entirely. The cover email from "Matt" to "Vijay" is not privileged. However, plaintiff may redact, as privileged, all text below the dotted line on page 1, exce..
More
ORDER
BARBARA MOSES, Magistrate Judge.
Defendants' challenge to certain of plaintiff's privilege designations (Dkt. No. 167) is resolved as follows:
The documents logged at Entries 13, 14, 22, 345, and 743 were properly withheld or redacted. The email logged at Entry 2851 should be produced in redacted form rather than withheld entirely. The cover email from "Matt" to "Vijay" is not privileged. However, plaintiff may redact, as privileged, all text below the dotted line on page 1, except for the heading "Recommendation," on page two, and the first bullet point under that heading.
SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Defendants initially listed the challenged entry as No. 284, which is a Microsoft Outlook receipt. Counsel later agreed that the entry defendants intended to challenge was No. 285, which is an email chain among Commerzbank personnel concerning the retention of the law firm Gibbs & Bruns. See Dkt. No. 174, at 3 n.8.
Source: Leagle
