Law Center Search Results

The NAM filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to protect attorney-client privilege for manufacturers. The plaintiffs sought privileged communications between the defendant company and a third-party supplier. The defendant company sought to withhold the documents on privilege grounds under the common interest doctrine. A district court granted the plaintiffs’ discovery request, reasoning that the third-party supplier was not represented by its own legal counsel, which broke the privilege. The district court’s holding set a troubling precedent that could sow uncertainty, encourage protracted and expensive discovery fights and expose confidential communications to a courtroom adversary. The NAM’s brief argued that the purposes of the attorney-client privilege and common-interest doctrine do not support a separate-representation requirement, and separate representation is often inefficient and unduly burdensome. Unfortunately, the court denied the mandamus petition.