Berkley Insurance Company v. Weddle Law PLLC
- Vargas
- 1:24-cv-08108
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Berkley Insurance v. Weddle Law, Judge Vargas granted in part and denied in part a motion to compel, protecting attorney-client communications.
Weddle Law PLLC did not obtain production of the disputed documents reviewed by the court. Berkley Insurance Company was allowed to withhold those documents based on attorney-client privilege, while the motion had already been granted in part concerning communications about loss reserves.
What happened
Berkley Insurance Company v. Weddle Law PLLC concerns Weddle Law’s request for documents about Berkley’s loss reserves and investigation of an insurance claim. Weddle Law was also identified as a counterclaim plaintiff, and Berkley as a counterclaim defendant.
The court had already granted part of Weddle Law’s request concerning communications about loss reserves. It then reviewed other disputed documents privately and without the parties present, after Berkley claimed attorney-client privilege or protection for attorney work product.
The court denied the request for those documents because the communications were confidential exchanges between Berkley and its lawyers seeking or providing legal advice about how New York law applied to the insurance policy. Judge Jeannette A. Vargas therefore ruled that the motion to compel was granted in part and denied in part.
The detailed version
- Berkley Insurance Company v. Weddle Law PLLC · No. 1:24-cv-08108
- Vargas
- Nov. 19, 2025
Background
On October 29, 2025, Weddle Law PLLC, identified as both the defendant and counterclaim plaintiff, moved to compel Berkley Insurance Company to produce two sets of documents concerning Berkley’s loss reserves and claim investigation.
The court had previously granted the motion insofar as it concerned communications about loss reserves. The court also ordered Berkley to submit unredacted copies of documents for private judicial review where Berkley had asserted the attorney-client privilege or work-product protection.
Ruling
After reviewing the disputed documents privately, the court denied Weddle Law’s request to compel production of those documents. The court applied the attorney-client privilege, which protects confidential communications between a client and its lawyer made to obtain or provide legal advice.
The court found that the communications satisfied each requirement: they were between Berkley and its counsel, were intended to remain confidential, and concerned obtaining or providing legal advice about applying New York law to the insurance policy at issue. The court also found that the communications primarily concerned legal advice rather than investigation of the underlying facts. The court therefore concluded that the attorney-client privilege protected them from disclosure.
Disposition
The court ordered that Weddle Law’s motion to compel was GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF No. 35.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.