midpage

Manning v. SikorskyjManning v. Sikorskyj

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
May 27, 1994
Versions:204 A.D.2d 976
614 N.Y.S.2d 949
1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6779

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: *977The record reflects that the attorney conducted the interview in question while acting as attorney for the estate of Lisa M. Manning, and we conclude that the tape recording of the interview was protected from discovery as attorney work product (see, CPLR 3101 [c]). It is not necessary for us to decide whether the tape is also protected by the attorney-client privilege on the ground that, at the time, the attorney was also representing Mary Beth Manning. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Glownia, J.—Discovery.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Balio, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.

Case Details

Case Name: Manning v. Sikorskyj
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: May 27, 1994
Citations: 204 A.D.2d 976; 614 N.Y.S.2d 949; 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6779
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
Log In