Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the plaintiff subjectively had a reasonable expectation of privacy to personal emails that she exchanged with her attorney on her work laptop with a password protected, personal email account
• finding plaintiff had reasonable expectation of privacy in “e-mails ... exchanged with her attorney on her personal, password-protected, web-based e-mail account, accessed on a company laptop”
• finding abuse or neglect where a father grabbed, choked, and punched the children, disregarding the substantial probability injury would result
• finding law firm’s review of privileged emails violated RPC 4.4(b), which provides that “lawyer who receives a document and has reasonable cause to believe that [it] was inadvertently sent” shall not read it
• finding law firm’s review of privileged emails violated RPC 4.4(b), which provides that “lawyer who receives a document and has reasonable cause to believe that [it] was inadvertently sent” shall not read it
• “By reading e-mails that were at least arguably privileged and failing to notify [plaintiff] promptly about them, [defendant]’s counsel breached RPC 4.4(b).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).