Beyer LLC v. Baldessari
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-03819
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Beyer LLC v. Baldessari, Magistrate Judge Netburn requested briefing on which state’s law governs an attorney-client privilege dispute and whether the privilege covers certain communications.
Beyer LLC, the defendants, and the Trust-related communications at issue in the privilege dispute, including communications shared with employees of JAB Art Enterprises, LLC, Sprueth Magers Gallery, and Jacqueline Silverman & Associates.
What happened
In Beyer LLC v. Baldessari, the plaintiff questioned the defendants’ claim that attorney-client privilege protected documents listed in a privilege log. The defendants submitted ten documents for the court’s private review, along with a letter and declaration providing context.
The court said it was unclear which state’s law governed the privilege dispute. Because the case is based on diversity jurisdiction and involves contracts with significant contacts in New York and California, the court asked both sides to brief which state’s law should apply.
Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn also requested briefing on whether the privilege between the Trust and its lawyers extends to communications shared with employees of JAB Art Enterprises, LLC, Sprueth Magers Gallery, and Jacqueline Silverman & Associates. The court did not yet decide the privilege issue and set deadlines for the defendants’ and plaintiff’s briefs.
The detailed version
- Beyer LLC v. Baldessari · No. 1:23-cv-03819
- Laura Swain
- Feb. 12, 2024
Background
The plaintiff expressed skepticism about the defendants’ assertion that attorney-client privilege protected certain documents identified in a privilege log. At the court’s direction, the defendants submitted ten documents for private judicial review. They also submitted an ex parte letter and a declaration from Annamarie Baldessari to provide context about the documents.
Choice of Privilege Law
The court observed that both sides appeared to assume that federal law governed the attorney-client privilege question. It explained, however, that Federal Rule of Evidence 501 provides that state law governs privilege in a civil case when state law supplies the rule of decision. Because this is a diversity case, the court stated that state law would govern the privilege issue.
The court further explained that a federal court hearing a diversity case generally applies the law of the state where it sits, including that state’s choice-of-law rules. Under New York’s “center of gravity” or “grouping of contacts” approach for contract disputes, the court noted that this case has significant contacts with both New York and California. It therefore requested briefing on which state’s law should supply the rule of decision. The court said it would apply the selected state’s law to resolve the pending privilege dispute.
Privilege Question and Order
The substantive privilege question concerns whether attorney-client communications between the Trust and its counsel remain protected when shared with employees of JAB Art Enterprises, LLC, Sprueth Magers Gallery, and Jacqueline Silverman & Associates. The court requested briefing on whether the privilege extends to those communications under the applicable state law.
The court ordered the defendants to file their letter brief by February 15, 2024, and the plaintiff to file its opposition by February 20, 2024. The order requested additional briefing; it did not resolve which state’s law applies or decide whether the communications are privileged.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.