A federal magistrate judge in Chicago on Tuesday is slated to hear arguments about a critical in-house counsel issue: Whether or not lawyers at McDonald’s USA retained their attorney-client and work product privilege while communicating with other employees and an outside consultant.

Earlier this month two lead plaintiffs in an antitrust class action filed a motion to compel McDonald’s to produce 19 documents it has listed as privileged. The suit involves a former “no poach” provision in the company’s contracts with franchisees, which required restaurants not to solicit or hire employees from other McDonald’s restaurants without the other franchisee’s consent.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]