Legal Opinion

Beasock v. Dioguardi Enterprises, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided February 21, 1986PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously modified, on the law, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: We hold that the absolute privilege protecting attorney’s work product from disclosure (CPLR 3101 [c]) extends not only to materials prepared for the litigation then in progress, but also to work product prepared for other litigation. The statute granting the privilege does not contain any language restricting its application. Moreover, the purpose of the privilege would be frustrated if work product of an attorney prepared for prior litigation could be used against…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Federal Trade Commission v. Grolier Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Bennett v. Troy Record Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1966
  4. Milone v. General Motors Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. CaldwellTexas Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Corcoran v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  3. Feig v. Lenox Hill HospitalNew York Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Finn v. RileyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  5. In re the Estate of JohnsonNew York Surrogate's Court · 1989

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API