Knopf et al v. Esposito et al

Filing 291

ORDER granting 270 Letter Motion for Discovery to the following extent. It is hereby ordered that Feldman will disclose by Monday, January 25, 2021 whether he has already produced to the plaintiffs all the material in his possession that is res ponsive to the request identified at the beginning of this Order. If Feldman has withheld from production any communications because he contends that they are privileged or irrelevant, he shall state so clearly. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on January 21, 2021) (vs)

Case 1:17-cv-05833-DLC Document 291 Filed 01/21/21 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------- X
:
NORMA KNOPF and MICHAEL KNOPF,
:
:
Plaintiffs,
:
-v:
:
FRANK M. ESPOSITO, DORSEY & WHITNEY,
:
LLP, NATHANIEL H. AKERMAN, EDWARD S.
:
FELDMAN, and MICHAEL HAYDEN SANFORD,
:
:
Defendants.
:
:
-------------------------------------- X

17cv5833(DLC)
ORDER

DENISE COTE, District Judge:
In a letter of January 18, 2021, the plaintiffs moved to
compel defendant-attorney Edward Feldman to produce his
communications with Michael Sanford from December 29, 2015 to
July 11, 2017.

An Order of January 19 required responsive

submissions by January 21.

The motion is granted to the

following extent.
This motion seeks to enforce the plaintiffs’ request for
the production of documents.

In his December 24, 2020 response

to the request, Feldman stated that the requested information is
already in the possession of the plaintiffs, is in the
possession of a third party, contains confidential information,
is irrelevant, and/or is covered by the attorney-client
privilege.

Case 1:17-cv-05833-DLC Document 291 Filed 01/21/21 Page 2 of 3

The requested information is not privileged to the extent
Feldman represented only Pursuit Holdings, LLP (“Pursuit”).
Pursuit was one of several companies owned and controlled by
Sanford.

In a letter of January 21, Feldman contends that he

only represented Pursuit and at no point represented Sanford
personally.

Pursuit has filed for bankruptcy and its Trustee

has waived “any attorney-client privilege on behalf of [Pursuit]
and will not object to the Knopfs obtaining any documents or
testimony in discovery which may otherwise be subject to an
attorney-client privilege held by [Pursuit].”
In his letter of January 21, non-party Sanford does not
contest that Pursuit’s attorney-client privilege was waived by
Pursuit’s Trustee.

Sanford asserts, however, that Feldman

functioned as an attorney for Pursuit, for Sanford’s other
companies, and perhaps for Sanford personally.
Feldman’s January 21 letter represents that he has already
produced all responsive documents in his possession to the
plaintiffs, that the documents are irrelevant, and that they are
privileged pursuant to a joint defense agreement.

If Feldman

has already produced all responsive documents to the plaintiffs,
there is no need for this Court to determine who Feldman has
represented and whether a further production is warranted.
Accordingly, it is hereby

2

Case 1:17-cv-05833-DLC Document 291 Filed 01/21/21 Page 3 of 3

ORDERED that Feldman will disclose by Monday, January 25,
2021 whether he has already produced to the plaintiffs all the
material in his possession that is responsive to the request
identified at the beginning of this Order.

If Feldman has

withheld from production any communications because he contends
that they are privileged or irrelevant, he shall state so
clearly.

Dated:

New York, New York
January 21, 2021

3