Case ID: ad2d_97/html/0736-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Kupferman, J. P.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rual Printing & Stationery Corp. et al., Appellants, v City of New York et al., Respondents.
   Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Seymour Schwartz, J.), entered on May 5, 1983, and orders of said court (Robert White, J.) both entered on June 2, 1983, unanimously affirmed. Respondents who submitted briefs shall recover of appellants one bill of $75 costs and disbursements of these appeals. Concur — Sullivan, Ross, Carro and Milonas, JJ.

Kupferman, J. P.

concurs in a memorandum as follows: I think it should be pointed out that one of the defendants-respondents has made an express waiver of the attorney-client privilege in a brief submitted to this court. Defendant Roger Craig Merritt, appearing pro se, in an apparent attempt to expedite resolution of this litigation, personally signed and submitted a brief containing that express waiver. Inasmuch as Special Term has ordered that discovery should continue while the case remained on the Trial Calendar, those items for which a privilege would have existed had there been no waiver should be produced expeditiously.