Yukos Capital SARL et al v. Feldman, No. 1:2015cv04964 - Document 107 (S.D.N.Y. 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION re: 104 LETTER MOTION for Discovery addressed to Judge Lewis A. Kaplan from Mary E. Flynn dated December 28, 2015. filed by Stitching Administratiekantoor Financial Performance Holdings, Yukos Capital SARL, Stitching Administratiekantoor Yukos International, Marc Fleischman, Yukos Hydrocarbons Investments Limited, Luxtona Limited. (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 1/1/2016) (Kaplan, Lewis)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Yukos Capital SARL et al v. Feldman Doc. 107 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------x YUKOS CAPITAL S.A.R.L., et al., Plaintiffs, -against- 15-cv-4964 (LAK) DANIEL CALEB FELDMAN, Defendant-Third Party Plaintiff, -againstDAVID GODFREY, et al., Third-Party Defendants. ---------------------------------------------x MEMORANDUM AND ORDER LEWIS A. KAPLAN, District Judge. Plaintiffs moved to compel defendant Feldman to (1) answer ten specific deposition questions that his counsel directed him not to answer on the ground of attorney-client privilege, (2) produce the so-called cooperation agreement between or among Feldman, on the one hand, and the Promneftstroyrelated “benefactors” who are paying his legal fees in this case, and (3) produce “documents concerning the Yukos Group that Feldman provided to Promneftstroy or its agents.” DI 104. Notably, Feldman, in responding to plaintiffs’ motion, has not relied upon the attorney-client privilege at all. He has shifted ground to a claim that the information sought is attorney work product and, indeed, opinion work product at that. This motion, which was made on December 28, 2015, has been handled on an expedited basis in view of the facts that (1) a hearing on plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction will begin on January 13, 2016, and (2) the discovery sought is said to be essential to proper development of the facts for the hearing. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
