Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
Reply to "Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous]Trying to think through this. I don't think the judge will care that they "ambushed" Jones with the crime-fraud exception, but he will care about the quality of the arguments. Stripping the attorney-client privilege (or in this case work product prepared by the IT firm in anticipation of litigation) is a big deal and it's not enough to just throw terms around. He's going to look at Wayfarer's arguments in their letter motion critically. I'm sure part of Freedman's strategy is PR, part of it is to actually get the documents, but I also think part of this is testing the waters to see how Liman reacts to the Vanzan stuff and calling it a cyber crime. The arguments in the letter motion are similar to Abel's new claims in Jones v Abel so this where Freedman can see how sympathetic Liman will be on this. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
