Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de179> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 5 of
5
with 100 items per page.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de179 RegisterActionDate "2019-01-28" @default.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de179 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER adopting 151 Amended Joint Rule 26(f) Report with the following modification: the Court declines to adopt the language of either Paragraph 5.a. or 5.b. Plaintiff's proposed language in Paragraph 5.b. implies that inadvertent disclosure of attorney-client-privileged or work-product-doctrine-protected information in this case could result in a finding of waiver of any attorney-client privilege or work-product-doctrine protection for any information regarding the same subject matter in all other federal or state proceedings; however, Federal Rule of Evidence 502(a) provides that only disclosures in this case that amount to intentional waiver of the attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine can result in subject matter waivers in all other proceedings. Plaintiff has not shown why the particular circumstances of this case warrant the Court entering an order under Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) that exposes Defendants to greater exposure than Federal Rule of Evidence 502(a) dictates. Conversely, Defendants' proposed language in Paragraph 5.a. would immunize them from a finding of waiver for purposes of this proceeding where they inadvertently disclosed in this proceeding attorney-client-privileged or work-product-doctrine-protected information due to their failure to take reasonable steps to prevent such disclosure, notwithstanding the fact that, under Federal Rule of Evidence 502(b), such a disclosure would not provide any such immunity. Defendants have not shown why the particular circumstances of this case warrant the Court entering an order pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) granting them greater protection than provided by Federal Rule of Evidence 502(b). Finally, it does not appear that the Court needs to enter an order for the claw-back language in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5)(B) to apply. Issued by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 01/28/2019. (AULD, L.) (Entered: 01/28/2019)" @default.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de179 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de179 OntologyLabel order @default.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de179 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de177 @default.