Matter of TGT, LLC v. Meli

2025 NY Slip Op 00180 · Appellate Division, First Department · January 9, 2025 · No. Index No. 153682/23 Appeal No. 3457-3457A Case No. 2024-02588

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed a trial court order compelling Hecht Partners, LLP to produce documents subject to attorney-client and work product privilege claims. The court determined that communications involving Richard Meli were necessary to facilitate Joseph Meli's legal representation, thereby preserving their privileged status, and found no sufficient common legal interest or work product protection for the contested entries. The appeals filed by Richard and Joseph Meli were dismissed without costs due to their lack of standing, as they had not opposed the original motion to compel discovery.

Court
Appellate Division, First Department
Writing for the Court
Moulton, J.P.; Kapnick; Scarpulla; Mendez; O'Neill Levy
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
January 9, 2025
Docket number
Index No. 153682/23 Appeal No. 3457-3457A Case No. 2024-02588
Procedural posture
Appeal from Supreme Court, New York County order granting TGT, LLC's motion to compel production of documents; appellants sought dismissal for lack of standing.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Richard Meli and Joseph Meli v. TGT, LLC
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

standingcivil procedureappellate procedure

Practice areas

civil procedureevidenceappellate procedurecommercial litigation

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Meli brothers have standing to appeal the order compelling production of documents.
  2. Whether the communications are protected by the attorney‑client privilege.
  3. Whether the work‑product privilege applies to the entries on the privilege log.

Holdings

  1. The appellants lack standing to appeal because they were not aggrieved by the grant of the motion to compel discovery.
  2. The court found no common legal interest and held that the communications were not privileged.
  3. The court held that the entries pertained to non‑legal tasks and therefore were not protected by the work‑product privilege.

Key quotations

"statements made to the agents or employees of the attorney or client . . . retain their confidential (and therefore, privileged) character, where the presence of such third parties is deemed necessary to enable the attorney-client communication" (Ambac Assur. Corp. v Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 27 NY3d 616, 623‑627 [2016]).
"not aggrieved by the grant of [TGT's] motion to compel discovery, as [they] did not oppose the motion" (Moore v Federated Dept. Stores, Inc., 94 AD3d 638, 639 [1st Dept 2012]).

Factual background

TGT, LLC moved to compel Hecht Partners, LLP to produce documents related to communications concerning the transfer of Joseph Meli's assets to irrevocable trusts. Hecht argued attorney‑client and work‑product privileges, asserting that third‑party involvement was necessary. The trial court ordered production of certain entries on a privilege log. The Meli brothers appealed the order.

Procedural history

The Supreme Court, New York County entered an order on April 7, 2024 granting TGT, LLC's motion to compel Hecht Partners to produce documents. The Meli brothers appealed, arguing lack of standing and privilege issues. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…