When the Disclosure of Privileged Communications Does Not Constitute a Waiver
In this edition of their Southern District Civil Practice Roundup, Edward M. Spiro and Christopher B. Harwood discuss a recent decision that addressed three notable exceptions to the third-party waiver rule.
December 13, 2021 at 12:00 PM
7 minute read
The disclosure of privileged communications to a third party typically constitutes a waiver of privilege as to those communications. Exceptions to the third-party waiver rule exist, however. In Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company, No. 18-11386 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 9, 2021), Southern District Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker addressed three notable exceptions to the third-party waiver rule: (1) the essential third-party consultant exception; (2) the functional equivalent exception (which has been adopted and applied in other Circuits, but has never been recognized by the Second Circuit); and (3) the common-interest exception. In applying these exceptions, Judge Parker concluded that the disclosure of privileged communications to the third parties at issue did not waive privilege.
'Spectrum'
Plaintiff Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited (Spectrum) sued defendant General Electric Company (GE) for breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation. During discovery, Spectrum produced 42 emails it later determined were privileged and sought to claw back those inadvertently produced documents. 2021 WL 4131650, at *1. GE consented as to most of the emails, but challenged the attempt to claw back four of them, claiming that they included third parties and therefore, any privilege that otherwise applied to them had been waived. Id.
The four challenged emails related to Spectrum's 2005 corporate restructuring and name change. Spectrum, then known as V-Target LLC, was owned and controlled by Dr. Shlomo Ben-Haim. Dr. Ben-Haim also owned another entity, Hobart Holding Ltd. (Hobart). Hobart, acting pursuant to a services agreement with Spectrum, tasked two Hobart employees—Guy Wollman and Miki Eden—to provide financial consulting services to Spectrum, which did not then employ any individuals who could provide financial consulting services. In the challenged emails, Wollman and Eden provided advice to, and received information from, Spectrum's legal counsel in connection with the corporate restructuring.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDecision of the Day: District Judge Vacates Magistrate's Ruling to Disqualify Prosecutors in Kidnapping Case
Decision of the Day: Judge Precludes Ballistics Expert's Opinion on Scene for 2016 Fatal Police Shooting
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 2No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 3Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 4Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 5Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250