In a general contractor’s legal malpractice case against two law firms that advised it in a construction contract dispute, an Appellate Division panel said the contractor must produce discovery related to its communications with counsel hired to replace the firms it is now suing.

In Lane Construction v. Munday, the panel on Tuesday said the exchange of letters and emails between Lane Construction of Denville and its successor counsel in the underlying action was integral to the case and not subject to attorney-client privilege in the legal malpractice suit against New Jersey-based firms Lowenstein Sandler and MARC Law.

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

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]