This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P seeks an order in part to compel D to produce for inspection and copying all minutes of the Employee Review Committee (ERC) or of any meeting at which Dt decided to place him on probation or terminate or suspend him. D objects to the production on grounds of attorney-client privilege and work product. It identifies a document titled, 'ERC Minutes May 1, 1995,' withheld on those grounds. Its former in-house attorney, Ronald Sandhaus, drafted it. D asserts that the attorney-client privilege protects the document from discovery because it 'contains material discussed between and among D employees and Sandhaus for purposes of rendering legal advice on how to address P's disciplinary problems.' It also suggests that the document is an attorney work product because Sandhaus prepared it in anticipation of litigation. D claims the document contains communications between counsel and other participants of the ERC meeting. It also claims that the document reflects Sandhaus' thoughts and mental impressions of the facts and reasons for the discharge of the plaintiff. P claims the legal advice Sandhaus may have given is merely incidental to business advice rendered. P contends that D waived any privilege that may have been attached to the minutes, when its Vice President of Properties, Nile Glasebrook, testified about the ERC meeting, including the general substance of the discussions.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.