In Stock v. Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis, 35 N.Y.S.3d 31 (June 30, 2016), the Appellate Division, First Department, addressed the issue of whether attorneys who have sought the advice of their law firm’s in-house general counsel on their ethical obligations in representing a then-current firm client may invoke the attorney-client privilege to resist the client’s demand for the disclosure of communications seeking or giving such advice.
The issue arose in the context of a legal malpractice action commenced by the client against the client’s former law firm and one of its partners involving an alleged failure of the firm to provide the client with appropriate advice and an alleged effort to cover up that wrongdoing by pursuing litigation and an arbitration proceeding against third parties.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
