Tobacco Documents Online

ARKIN SCHAFFER & KAPLAN LLP ATli'MKkYS AT LAW 't97M18Y.S. AN14 Hrw.N L S~ )ESSntY &i Kstav ns~" S. co~ HMw.ADI. IGPLA.y -]OWN L2E 1vIATALON cIX1b6SC - Hnv.rtr s. Ftesx Mwnnsw x. xnvsasncx Gso~ F. MeitxexotFA STxacx: G. SumEa.9 P~~ s. wAUW `A~ whY.CA,DC -A~ 9i m r4 1370 AveNLM oa THE Aaffwcas Nsw Yox[c, Nmv Yowc 1001911602 TEL (212) 333-0200 - FAx (212) 333-2350 WRr[EA'S DIRSCTDIAL BY FACSIMILE (713) 333-0209 August 11, 1998 Walter P. Loughlin, Latham & Watkins 885 Third Avenue Esq. New York, NY 10022-4802 Re: Liaaett Groun Dear Mr. Loughlin: This is in response to your August 10, 1998 letter. First, the fact that Liggett is now adverse to the other tobacco companies does not and logically could not preclude its lawyers from conducting a privilege review with respect to arguably joint-defense documents. It is, indeed, common for parties to a joint agreement subsequently to develop conflicting interests and equally common, in such instances, for the parties' counsel to conduct joint defense privilege reviews. Your suggestion to the contrary is utterly nonsensical and frankly, suspect (and the case you cite has nothing whatsoever to do with this issue). Indeed, given that (a) Liggett has demanded access to the documents to comply with grand jury subpoenas issued in an investigation of the tobacco industry, and (b) it is well known that the investigation embraces issues regarding certain of the industry's long-time litigation counsel, it is your firm -- and not mine or Mr. Kasowitz's -- which should stay clear of any review of the documents that might ultimately impact what is produced to the grand jury. 91 NY2d 30 (1997). Second, you seem to believe that you are not required to turn over attorney work product. This is incorrect under the Court of Appeals' decision in Sa e Realty Corporation v. Proskauer Goetz & Mendelsohn, LLP,j ~ iQCqJx®¢ins•••••••••r- •..&FMC~ - 2N9CwPmP+aBw.r.a5mv~ im.wnc.[A9o67-a13 Alfi$I-91i6 FntOIO)SS24OT/ £0i20'd 05£2 £££ 2S2 NtfIdGN 8 213ddF9iOS NINJd b£s22 866S-iT-sf1t1

£0"d -itl101 ARKIN SCHAFFER & KAPLAN LLP Walter P. Loughlin, Esq. August 11, 1998 Page 2 Finally, Liggett has previously indicated that it will reimburse your reasonable costs in retrieving the documents. However, there is no basis for paying you to conduct a privilege review. Your continuing to raise specious arguments to resist turning over to Liggett its own documents is unseemly. While your obstructive tactics may leave Liggett no choice but to involve the Department of Justice, I cannot imagine why you would force us to do so, that is, unless your loyalty is not to your former client, but rather to the big to2,acco club. cc: Phillip Vro£sky, Esq. £0i£0'd 0S£2 £££ 2T2 Ntlldtl)i 8 tl3ddtlN:)S NI>2iC b£:2T 866T-TT-911C