Vinci Brands LLC v. Coach Services, Inc.
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:23-cv-05138
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Vinci Brands v. Coach Services, Judge Schofield ordered Vinci to disclose one email and Case-Mate to remove improper redactions.
Vinci Brands LLC and Case-Mate, Inc., regarding their document productions and redactions.
What happened
In Vinci Brands LLC v. Coach Services, Inc., Vinci Brands and Case-Mate each asked the court to require the other to produce unredacted text messages.
After privately reviewing selected redacted messages and related material, the court ordered Vinci to produce an unredacted two-line email by May 3, 2024. The court also ordered Case-Mate to review its entire production and remove all redactions except those protected by attorney-client privilege or the work-product doctrine.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield ruled that the email was not protected by attorney-client privilege because it was not sent to give or receive legal advice. The order also required Case-Mate to record otherwise unlogged privilege-based redactions in a privilege log.
The detailed version
- Vinci Brands LLC v. Coach Services, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-05138
- Lorna Schofield
- Apr. 30, 2024
Background
On April 19, 2024, Vinci Brands LLC and Case-Mate, Inc. filed a joint letter in which each sought an order requiring the other to produce unredacted text messages. Under an earlier court order, each party selected fourteen redacted text messages for the court’s private review: seven redacted by Vinci and seven redacted by Case-Mate.
Rulings
The court ordered Vinci to produce, by May 3, 2024, an unredacted version of one specified two-line email dated March 20, 2024. The court held that the email was not protected by the attorney-client privilege because it was not a communication for giving or receiving legal advice.
The court also ordered Case-Mate, by May 8, 2024, to review its entire document production and remove all redactions except those protected by the attorney-client privilege or the work-product doctrine. The court required any such redactions that were not already recorded to be identified in a privilege log.
Disposition
This was a discovery order concerning redactions and claims of privilege. The court ordered the specified production by Vinci and the broader redaction review by Case-Mate.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.