A memorandum order released today reveals that, in an antitrust case against Uber’s CEO (covered here), Judge Rakoff became concerned over improper investigative techniques that Uber (or its agents) employed. Specifically, Uber hired an firm called Ergo to investigate the plaintiff and plaintiff’s counsel, and, in doing so, Ergo’s investigator allegedly made various misrepresentations to gain information, such as claiming that he was a reporter writing a profile of plaintiff’s counsel.
At a hearing (the transcript of which remains nonpublic), Judge Rakoff ordered broad discovery from Uber — including from an Uber in-house attorney — and from Ergo concerning the investigation. In the order released today, Judge Rakoff denied Uber’s motion to reconsider a portion of his ruling calling for in camera review of privileged material as possibly falling within the “crime-fraud” exception to the privilege: Continue Reading Judge Rakoff Authorizes Discovery from Uber Counsel to Probe Potentially Improper Investigation of Adversary and Opposing Counsel