Carbis Walker, LLP v. Hill, Barth and King, LLC
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION BY
ORIE MELVIN, J.:
¶ 1 Appellant, Hill, Barth and King, LLC (hereafter HBK), appeals from the trial court’s June 21, 2006 order which granted a motion for protective order filed by Appellee, Carbis Walker, LLP (hereafter CW). HBK asserts that the document which the trial court ruled was discoverable by CW is protected by the attorney-client privilege. After careful review, we affirm.
¶ 2 The facts which are necessary to understand the issues on appeal are essentially not in dispute and may be summarized as follows. CW and HBK are competing accounting/consulting firms with offices in…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Griffith v. United Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
- Commonwealth v. EichingerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Ben v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- McNeil v. JordanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Hartford Fire Insurance v. GarveyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1985
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Office of the Governor v. R.H. Davis, Jr.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- Custom Designs & Manufacturing Co. v. Sherwin-Williams Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Pennsylvania v. Exxon Mobil Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2016
- Law Office of Douglas T. Harris v. Philadelphia Waterfront Partners, LPSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
- Salsman v. BrownSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.