Stribling Brothers Machinery Co. v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding defendants’ failure to timely serve privilege log waived any privilege that might otherwise be asserted
• using an objective “reasonably should know” standard when a party “learns” under Rule 26(e) that “its prior discovery responses [are] materially inaccurate or incomplete”
• “The burden of establishing each element of the [attorney-client] privilege, including the absence of any waiver, is upon the party asserting the privilege.”
• documents prepared for public dissemination not intended as a confidential communication not within privilege
• “Draft documents prepared by a client and submitted to counsel to facilitate rendering legal advice on proposed transactions may remain privileged although the final version was intended for distribution to third-parties.”
• “Plaintiff's argument, that documents later created by Plaintiff otherwise responsive to Defendants’ Document Requests…are not within the supplementation duty under Rule 26(e), is therefore contrary to the history and text of Rule 26(e).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).