Lopes

Lopes v. Vieira

Good Law
719 F. Supp. 2d 1199·2010 WL 2546050·2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62488
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 23, 2010Case CV-F-06-1243 OWW/SMSCalifornia2,029 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wanger, J.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT DOWNEY BRAND’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (Doc. 222), DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO FILE AND DOCKET DOWNEY BRAND’S SECOND CORRECTED PRIVILEGE LOG, AND DIRECTING DOWNEY BRAND TO RETAIN PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS FOR IN CAMERA REVIEW

Before the Court is Defendant Downey Brand LLP’s motion for reconsideration of the “Memorandum Decision and Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Production of Discovery and For Sanctions (Doc. 104), Denying Defendant Downey Brand’s Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 106), and Denying Defendant Downey Brand’s Motion for Summary Judgment Against Plaintiff Valley Gold LLC on the Issue of Attorney-Client Privilege (Doc. 96)” filed on February 1, 2010 (“February 1 Memorandum Decision”). Specifically, Downey Brand seeks reconsideration of the denial of its invocation of the work-product doctrine in response to Plaintiffs’ Requests for Documents Nos. 18-21. The February 1 Memorandum Decision ruled:

Downey Brand requests reconsideration of this ruling on the following grounds:

Although the contested materials are not protected by the attorney-client privilege, whether Downey Brand can…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.