Celotex Corp. v. Hillsborough Holdings Corp. (In Re Hillsborough Holdings Corp.)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that the privilege does not “ordinarily extend to the fact that the client has retained the attorney”
• holding under Florida law, client documents in accountant’s possession did not become privileged because of accountant’s notations on them, and should be produced after redacting any privileged notations
• discussing choice of law in the context of alter ego claims and finding that where no discernible difference exists, choice of law is insignificant
• “A court is not required to examine all the factors and the facts of each case will help dictate those factors most relevant to a court’s inquiry.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).