For litigation lawyers at every level of seniority, preproduction document review may seem a mundane task, requiring little sophistication or analysis. However, the potential pitfalls of document review are numerous and, when it comes to matters of privilege, the stakes are high.
This article offers guidance to New Jersey practitioners on how to identify and navigate one source of possible confusion in a privilege review: the common interest doctrine. The common interest doctrine is an extension of the attorney-client privilege, which is invoked "[i]f two or more clients with a common interest in a litigation or nonlitigated matter are represented by separate lawyers and they agree to exchange information concerning the matter, a communication of any such client … is privileged against third persons." In re Teleglobe Commc’ns Corp., 493 F.3d 345, 366 (3d. Cir. 2007) (applying Delaware law); accord McLane Foodservice v. Ready Pac Produce, No. 10-6076, 2012 WL 1981559, at *4 (D.N.J. June 1, 2012) (applying New Jersey 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This content has been archived.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
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]
