Legal Opinion
Leibel v. General Motors Corp.
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided June 14, 2002No. Docket 224734PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSaad, P.J.
I. NATURE OF THE CASE
Plaintiffs attached to their complaint a document (identified as the “Toth Memo”) that General Motors (GM) says is protected from use in this litigation by the attorney-client privilege and the work-product doctrine. This document was prepared by a GM in-house lawyer, Gary Toth, and renders legal advice to agents of GM regarding ongoing products liability litigation involving alleged defectively designed seat-backs in rear-end collisions.
Plaintiffs say that the Toth Memo is not privileged because (1) the document is essentially factual, not legal, and (2) GM waived its…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. NoblesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Trammel v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Augustine v. Allstate InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
- Anna Maday v. Public Libraries of SaginawCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- 46th Circuit Trial Court v. Crawford CountyMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
- D’alessandro Contracting Group, LLC v. WrightMichigan Court of Appeals · 2014
- Estate of Chance Aaron Nash v. City of Grand HavenMichigan Court of Appeals · 2017
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.