METROPOLITAN PARTNERS GROUP ADMINISTRATION LLC v. RSG LLC (2026)

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Melissa A. Crane, J.), entered on or about April 16, 2025, which denied defendants Brian Nerney's and David Horton's (the Individual Defendants) motion to disqualify Jonathan A. Sorkowitz as counsel for defendant Schweizer RSG, LLC and their request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction under CPLR 6301 and/or a protective order under CPLR 3103(c) prohibiting plaintiffs from using or disclosing the Individual Defendants’ privileged information, unanimously dismissed with respect to the issue of disqualification, as moot, and the order otherwise affirmed, without costs.

The parties have stipulated to the fact that the portion of the Individual Defendants’ appeal seeking reversal of the Supreme Court's denial of their request to disqualify Mr. Sorkowitz as counsel for Schweizer is moot because Mr. Sorkowitz has since withdrawn as counsel for Schweizer.

Furthermore, neither injunctive relief nor a protective order is warranted to prevent plaintiffs from using or disclosing the Individual Defendants’ alleged privileged information, which is purportedly saved on Schweizer laptops and in Schweizer's client files with third-party vendors.  In support of their claims, the Individual Defendants rely on the common-interest privilege, but as they assert that privilege for the first time on reply, it is not properly before us, and we do not consider it.  In any event, the Individual Defendants had no “reasonable assurance of confidentiality” in any communications stored on Schweizer systems because there is a clear disclaimer of privacy in the Schweizer employee manual.  Further, the Individual Defendants knew about plaintiffs’ ability to appoint a receiver and seize collateral, including their Schweizer laptops and any other documents belonging to Schweizer (see Peerenboom v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, 148 A.D.3d 531, 531–532, 50 N.Y.S.3d 49 [1st Dept. 2017]).