Case Concepts International, LLC v. Teich, Beim & Moro, C.P.A.'s, P.C.
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:16-cv-07664
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Case Concepts International v. Teich, Beim & Moro, Judge Karas's file contains plaintiffs' letter opposing broad discovery and disclosure of privileged materials.
The discovery dispute directly concerns the plaintiffs and defendants in the accounting-malpractice case. The provided document does not show any court ruling affecting their claims or legal rights.
What happened
Case Concepts International, LLC v. Teich, Beim & Moro, C.P.A.'s, P.C. concerns plaintiffs' response to defendants' request for a discovery conference in an accounting-malpractice case.
Plaintiffs' counsel argued that defendants' requests for extensive financial records were irrelevant and too burdensome, and that certain communications were protected by attorney-client privilege or the work-product doctrine. Plaintiffs asked that the discovery-conference request be denied.
Judge Kenneth Karas's ruling is not included in the provided document. The document is a letter from plaintiffs' counsel, not a court order, so no disposition of the discovery dispute can be reported.
The detailed version
- Case Concepts International, LLC v. Teich, Beim & Moro, C.P.A.'s, P.C. · No. 7:16-cv-07664
- Kenneth Karas
- Jan. 6, 2020
Document Provided
The provided text is a December 30, 2019 letter from plaintiffs' counsel to Judge Kenneth M. Karas. It is not a judicial opinion or order, and it does not state that the court granted, denied, or otherwise resolved any motion.
Background
The plaintiffs are Case Concepts International, LLC, Raul Riveros, Ximena Y. Barrera Riveros, Edward Bell, and Pamela Bell. The defendants are Teich, Beim & Moro, C.P.A.'s P.C. and David A. Teich. Plaintiffs describe the case as an accounting-malpractice action. They state that defendants served 49 document requests and that plaintiffs had produced more than 8,000 pages.
Plaintiffs' Position on Discovery
Plaintiffs argued that defendants were seeking overly broad financial information, including mortgage and loan materials, wills and trusts, and records concerning foreign accounts over periods of more than a decade. Plaintiffs contended that these materials would not show whether Riveros knew about reporting duties for foreign financial accounts, including Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts filings. They also argued that the requests were not proportional to the needs of the case because the burden and expense of producing the documents outweighed any likely benefit.
Plaintiffs' Position on Privilege
Plaintiffs also opposed producing certain communications and invoices involving attorneys and accountants who performed corrective work after plaintiffs learned of the alleged disclosure obligations. Plaintiffs argued that these materials were protected by attorney-client privilege or the work-product doctrine. They further argued that the privilege had not been waived merely because the information might be relevant, asserting that they did not intend to rely on privileged advice to prove their malpractice or continuing-representation claims.
Disposition
The provided text records plaintiffs' request that defendants' request for a pre-motion discovery conference be denied. It does not include Judge Karas's decision or any other court disposition. Accordingly, no ruling on the discovery requests or privilege issues can be identified from this document.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.