Extract to table
Pull the structured facts out of a document: parties, dates, amounts, obligations.
Extract to table / opposition-to-motion-to-compel.docx
opposition-to-motion-to-compel.docx
Parties
DIVISION MERIDIAN INFRASTRUCTURE PARTNERS LLC
M. Ricci
HARKNESS LLP
Defendant Northgate Fiber Americas Inc
Plaintiff Meridian Infrastructure Partners LLC
Northgate Telecommunications PLC
Meridian Infrastructure Partners LLC
Ridgepoint Capital Group LP
Dates
December 2, 2024
November 22, 2024
March 15, 2020
April 1, 2024
October 31, 2024
January 18, 2024
February 1, 2024
February 19, 2024
July 15, 2024
September 3, 2024
Amounts
$1.2
$200
$149
$49
$81.7
$18.3
Obligations
The premise of Meridian's argument is that the 214 withheld documents are "relevant" to this theory and therefore must be produced
New York courts have adopted this broad formulation, recognizing that corporate counsel must be able to communicate with employees at all levels of the organization in order to provide fully informed legal advice
Corporate decision-makers must be able to receive legal advice in a boardroom setting without fear that the confidentiality of that advice will be compromised in subsequent litigation
Stripped of its rhetorical embellishments, Meridian's primary argument in support of its motion to compel is that the 214 documents are "highly relevant" to its pretext theory and therefore must be produced
Indeed, the privilege typically becomes most important — and must be most vigorously enforced — in precisely those cases where the privileged communications are most relevant to the opposing party's litigation position
Under CPLR § 3122, a party withholding documents on the basis of privilege is required to "state with reasonable particularity the reason such documents are not produced