Gonzales v. West End Iron & Metal Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that for this rule to apply, “the asserting party [must] put the protected information at issue by making it relevant to the case”
• sweeping reference to 60 boxes of documents failed to provide guidance and neglected duty to specify documents by category and location
• Kovel “carefully limited the attorney-client privilege ... to when the accountant functions as a ‘translator’ between the client and the attorney”
• also applying Hearn but nonetheless finding that “the party now asserting the privilege took an affirmative act by raising a ‘reliance on counsel’ defense”
• \the Government never alleges that Debtors' productions were so disorganized as to indicate that documents were not produced as kept in the regular course of business.\
• “Communication between an attorney and a third party does not become shielded by the attorney-client privilege solely because the communication proves important to the ability to represent the client.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).