{"id":"court_ctb_1061_1","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":1061,"sub_number":1,"doc_type":"EXHIBIT","filed_date":"2022-11-02","title":"EXHIBIT A","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# **EXHIBIT**\n\n**A**\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1061-1 Filed 11/02/22 Entered 11/02/22 16:17:29 Page 2 of 12\n\n### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| __________________________________________ | |\n|--------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|\n| In re | :
:
Chapter 11 |\n| HO WON KWOK, | :
:
Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtor.
__________________________________________: | :
: |\n\n## **REVISED PRIVILEGE LOG DOCUMENTS OF VERDOLINO & LOWEY AND BROWN RUDNICK**\n\n| Bates | Date | Custodia | Type of | Parties | Subject | Claimed | Personal Harm |\n|-------|----------|----------------------|-----------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|----------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | n | Document | | | Privilege | |\n| None | 10/19/21 | Verdolino
& Lowey | Agreement | Golden Spring
(New York)
Ltd., Kwok Ho
Wan, Ace
Decade
Holdings
Limited and
Dawn State | Litigation
Funding | Attorney-Work
Product.1 | The withheld document
relates to an action
pending in the United
Kingdom styled Kwok
Ho Wan v. UBS AG,
Claim No. CL-2020-
000345 (High Court of
Justice Business and |\n| | | | | Limited | | | Property Courts of |\n| | | | | | | | England and
Wales |\n| | | | | | | | Commercial Court)
(the |\n\n1 *See Cont'l Circuits LLC v. Intel Corp*, 435 F. Supp. 3d 1014, 1021 (D. AZ 2020) (concluding that litigation funding agreements were prepared because of litigation and therefore constitute attorney work product). *See also Lambeth Magnetic Structures, LLC v. Seagate Tech (US) Holdings, Inc.*, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215773, \\*16-\\*17 (W.D. Pa, Jan. 18, 2018) (holding that communications with litigation funders and funding agreement are work product and denying motion to compel the production of same).\n\n| | | | \"UK Action\"). The |\n|--|--|--|----------------------------|\n| | | | Bankruptcy Court's |\n| | | | September 14, 2022, |\n| | | | Consent Order |\n| | | | Regarding Control of |\n| | | | Attorney-Client |\n| | | | Privilege and Work |\n| | | | Product Protection |\n| | | | Related to Rule 2004 |\n| | | | Subpoenaed
Documents |\n| | | | and Information (the |\n| | | | \"Privilege Order\") |\n| | | | specifically recognizes |\n| | | | that the Debtor may |\n| | | | have privileges under |\n| | | | the laws of the United |\n| | | | Kingdom that could be |\n| | | | asserted
by the Debtor |\n| | | | in the UK Action. See |\n| | | | Privilege Order, at sec. |\n| | | | 9. The Debtor has thus |\n| | | | withheld
this document |\n| | | | from
production for the |\n| | | | express purpose of |\n| | | | ensuring that he is |\n| | | | preserving, and not |\n| | | | waiving, any privilege |\n| | | | that he may have
to |\n| | | | assert against production |\n| | | | or disclosure
of the |\n| | | | same document in the |\n| | | | UK Action. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1061-1 Filed 11/02/22 Entered 11/02/22 16:17:29 Page 4 of 12\n\n| BR_ | 10/19/21 | Brown | Agreement | Golden Spring | Litigation | Attorney-Work | The withheld document |\n|----------|----------|---------|-----------|-------------------|------------|------------------|----------------------------|\n| KWOK | | Rudnick | | (New York) | Funding | Product; | relates to the UK |\n| 00020991 | | | | Ltd., Kwok Ho | | Common Interest | Action. The
Privilege |\n| | | | | Wan, Ace | | | Order
specifically |\n| | | | | Decade | | | recognizes that the |\n| | | | | Holdings | | | Debtor may have |\n| | | | | Limited and | | | privileges under the |\n| | | | | Dawn State | | | laws of the United |\n| | | | | Limited | | | Kingdom that could be |\n| | | | | | | | asserted
by the Debtor |\n| | | | | | | | in the UK Action. See |\n| | | | | | | | Privilege Order, at sec. |\n| | | | | | | | 9. The Debtor has thus |\n| | | | | | | | withheld
this document |\n| | | | | | | | from
production for the |\n| | | | | | | | express purpose of |\n| | | | | | | | ensuring that he is |\n| | | | | | | | preserving, and not |\n| | | | | | | | waiving, any privilege |\n| | | | | | | | that he may have
to |\n| | | | | | | | assert against production |\n| | | | | | | | or disclosure
of the |\n| | | | | | | | same document in the |\n| | | | | | | | UK Action. |\n| BR_ | 3/9/22 | Brown | Email | Melissa Francis, | Advice | Attorney-Client. | The withheld document |\n| KWOK | | Rudnick | Thread | Esq.,
Jennifer | regarding | | relates to advice from |\n| 00028970 | | | | Morrisey, | litigation | | counsel representing the |\n| | | | | Damon Parker, | fees and | | Debtor in UK Action |\n| | | | | Edward | the | | and the impact
that the |\n| | | | | Argles,2 | potential | | production of a |\n\n2 Ms. Morrisey, Mr. Parker and Mr. Argles are, or were at the time of the email, professionals employed by Harcus Parker Limited, the Debtor's UK counsel in the UK Action.\n\n| | | | | Bennett
Silverberg,
Esq., Aaron
Mitchell,
Esq.,
and Robert
Stark, Esq. | harm to the
Debtor in
the UK
Action of
the
production
of the UBS
litigation
funding
agreement
in response
to
discovery
requests
made to the
Debtor in
his
Bankruptcy
case. | | document in the
Debtor's Bankruptcy
case could have on the
Debtor in the UK
Action.
The
Privilege
Order
specifically
recognizes that the
Debtor may have
privileges under the
laws of the United
Kingdom that could be
asserted
by the Debtor
in the UK Action. See
Privilege Order, at sec.
9. The Debtor has thus
withheld
this document
from
production for the
express purpose of
ensuring that he is
preserving, and not
waiving, any privilege
that he may have
to
assert against production
or disclosure of the
same document in the
UK Action. |\n|-----------------------------------|--------|------------------|---------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| BR_
KWOK
00028562;
22535 | 3/3/22 | Brown
Rudnick | Invoice | Lalive SA –
Debtor's Swiss
counsel in
connection with
UBS action. | Invoice | Attorney-Client
(privilege may be
governed by
Swiss law) | The withheld document
is an invoice from
counsel representing the
Debtor in an action
pending in Switzerland
which action was filed
solely to preserve the |\n\n| | | | Debtor's rights to |\n|--|--|--|-----------------------------|\n| | | | pursue UBS in |\n| | | | Switzerland in the event |\n| | | | that a motion filed in the |\n| | | | UK
Action to move the |\n| | | | case from the UK to |\n| | | | Switzerland was |\n| | | | granted, it was not. The |\n| | | | case filed in |\n| | | | Switzerland,
and to |\n| | | | which the invoice |\n| | | | relates, is effectively the |\n| | | | same case as the UK |\n| | | | Action. The
Privilege |\n| | | | Order
specifically |\n| | | | recognizes that the |\n| | | | Debtor may have |\n| | | | privileges under the |\n| | | | laws of the United |\n| | | | Kingdom that could be |\n| | | | asserted
by the Debtor |\n| | | | in the UK Action. See |\n| | | | Privilege Order, at sec. |\n| | | | 9. The Debtor has thus |\n| | | | withheld
this document |\n| | | | from
production for the |\n| | | | express purpose of |\n| | | | ensuring that he is |\n| | | | preserving, and not |\n| | | | waiving, any privilege |\n| | | | that he may have
to |\n| | | | assert against production |\n| | | | or disclosure
of the |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 1061-1 Filed 11/02/22 Entered 11/02/22 16:17:29 Page 7 of\n\n| | | | | | | | same document in the
UK Action, whether
under UK law or Swiss
law. |\n|-------------------------|--------|------------------|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| BR_
KWOK
00027065 | 3/9/22 | Brown
Rudnick | Email
Thread | Melissa Francis,
Esq.,
Jennifer
Morrisey,
Damon Parker,
Edward Argles,
Bennett
Silverberg,
Esq., Aaron
Mitchell, Esq.,
and Robert
Stark, Esq. | Advice
regarding
litigation
fees and
the
potential
harm to the
Debtor in
the UK
Action of
the
production
of the UBS
litigation
funding
agreement
in response
to
discovery
requests
made to the
Debtor in
his
Bankruptcy
case. | Attorney-Client. | The withheld document
relates to advice from
counsel representing the
Debtor in UK Action
and the impact
that the
production of a
document in the
Debtor's Bankruptcy
case could have on the
Debtor in the UK
Action.
The
Privilege
Order
specifically
recognizes that the
Debtor may have
privileges under the
laws of the United
Kingdom that could be
asserted
by the Debtor
in the UK Action. See
Privilege Order, at sec.
9. The Debtor has thus
withheld
this document
from
production for the
express purpose of
ensuring that he is
preserving, and not
waiving, any privilege
that he may have
to |\n| | | | | | | | assert against production |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 1061-1 Filed 11/02/22 Entered 11/02/22 16:17:29 Page 8 of\n\n| | | | | | | | or disclosure of the |\n|----------|---------|---------|--------|-------------------|-------------|------------------|------------------------------|\n| | | | | | | | same document in the |\n| | | | | | | | UK Action. |\n| BR_ | 3/17/22 | Brown | Email | Melissa Francis, | Comments | Attorney-Client. | The withheld document |\n| KWOK | | Rudnick | Thread | Esq.,
Jennifer | from the | | relates to advice from |\n| 00023917 | | | | Morrisey, | Debtor's | | counsel representing the |\n| | | | | Edward Argles, | UK Action | | Debtor in UK Action |\n| | | | | Bennett | counsel | | regarding disclosures
to |\n| | | | | Silverberg, | regarding | | be made by the Debtor |\n| | | | | Esq., | the | | in his Bankruptcy Court |\n| | | | | | description | | filings related to the
UK |\n| | | | | | of the UK | | Action. The
Privilege |\n| | | | | | Action to | | Order
specifically |\n| | | | | | be utilized | | recognizes that the |\n| | | | | | in the | | Debtor may have |\n| | | | | | Debtor's | | privileges under the |\n| | | | | | affidavit | | laws of the United |\n| | | | | | and other | | Kingdom that could be |\n| | | | | | Bankruptcy | | asserted
by the Debtor |\n| | | | | | Court | | in the UK Action. See |\n| | | | | | filings. | | Privilege Order, at sec. |\n| | | | | | | | 9. The Debtor has thus |\n| | | | | | | | withheld
this document |\n| | | | | | | | from
production for the |\n| | | | | | | | express purpose of |\n| | | | | | | | ensuring that he is |\n| | | | | | | | preserving, and not |\n| | | | | | | | waiving, any privilege |\n| | | | | | | | that he may have
to |\n| | | | | | | | assert against production |\n| | | | | | | | or disclosure of the |\n| | | | | | | | same document in the |\n| | | | | | | | UK Action. |\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 1061-1 Filed 11/02/22 Entered 11/02/22 16:17:29 Page 9 of\n\n| BR_ | 3/17/22 | Brown | Email | Melissa Francis, | Comments | Attorney-Client. | The withheld document |\n|----------|---------|---------|--------|-------------------|-------------|------------------|------------------------------|\n| KWOK | | Rudnick | Thread | Esq.,
Jennifer | from the | | relates to advice from |\n| 00023528 | | | | Morrisey, | Debtor's | | counsel representing the |\n| | | | | Edward Argles, | UK Action | | Debtor in UK Action |\n| | | | | Bennett | counsel | | regarding disclosures
to |\n| | | | | Silverberg, | regarding | | be made by the Debtor |\n| | | | | Esq., | the | | in his Bankruptcy Court |\n| | | | | | description | | filings related to the
UK |\n| | | | | | of the UK | | Action. The
Privilege |\n| | | | | | Action to | | Order
specifically |\n| | | | | | be utilized | | recognizes that the |\n| | | | | | in the | | Debtor may have |\n| | | | | | Debtor's | | privileges under the |\n| | | | | | affidavit | | laws of the United |\n| | | | | | and other | | Kingdom that could be |\n| | | | | | Bankruptcy | | asserted
by the Debtor |\n| | | | | | Court | | in the UK Action. See |\n| | | | | | filings. | | Privilege Order, at sec. |\n| | | | | | | | 9. The Debtor has thus |\n| | | | | | | | withheld
this document |\n| | | | | | | | from
production for the |\n| | | | | | | | express purpose of |\n| | | | | | | | ensuring that he is |\n| | | | | | | | preserving, and not |\n| | | | | | | | waiving, any privilege |\n| | | | | | | | that he may have
to |\n| | | | | | | | assert against production |\n| | | | | | | | or disclosure of the |\n| | | | | | | | same document in the |\n| | | | | | | | UK Action. |\n| BR_ | 3/17/22 | Brown | Email | Melissa Francis, | Comments | Attorney-Client. | The withheld document |\n| KWOK | | Rudnick | Thread | Esq., Jennifer | from the | | relates to advice from |\n| 00021709 | | | | Morrisey, | Debtor's | | counsel representing the |\n\n| Edward Argles, | UK Action | |\n|----------------|-----------|--|\n| Bennett | counsel | |\n\n| Debtor in UK Action |\n|------------------------------|\n| regarding disclosures
to |\n| be made by the Debtor |\n| in his Bankruptcy Court |\n| filings related to the
UK |\n| Action. The
Privilege |\n| Order
specifically |\n| recognizes that the |\n| Debtor may have |\n| privileges under the |\n| laws of the United |\n| Kingdom that could be |\n| asserted
by the Debtor |\n| in the UK Action. See |\n| Privilege Order, at sec. |\n| 9. The Debtor has thus |\n| withheld
this document |\n| from
production for the |\n| express purpose of |\n| ensuring that he is |\n| preserving, and not |\n| waiving, any privilege |\n| that he may have
to |\n| |\n\n| | | | | Silverberg,
Esq., | regarding
the
description
of the UK
Action to
be utilized
in the
Debtor's
affidavit
and other
Bankruptcy
Court
filings. | | be made by the Debtor
in his Bankruptcy Court
filings related to the
UK
Action. The
Privilege
Order
specifically
recognizes that the
Debtor may have
privileges under the
laws of the United
Kingdom that could be
asserted
by the Debtor
in the UK Action. See
Privilege Order, at sec.
9. The Debtor has thus
withheld
this document
from
production for the
express purpose of
ensuring that he is
preserving, and not
waiving, any privilege
that he may have
to
assert against production
or disclosure of the
same document in the
UK Action. |\n|-------------------------|---------|------------------|------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| BR_
KWOK
00021713 | 3/17/22 | Brown
Rudnick | Attachment
to email | Jennifer
Morrisey,
Edward Argles, | Comments
from the
Debtor's
UK Action
counsel
regarding | Attorney-Client | The withheld document
relates to advice from
counsel representing the
Debtor in UK Action
regarding disclosures
to
be made by the Debtor |\n\n| | | | | | the
description
of the UK
Action to
be utilized
in the
Debtor's
affidavit
and other
Bankruptcy
Court
filings. | | in his Bankruptcy Court
filings related to the
UK
Action. The
Privilege
Order
specifically
recognizes that the
Debtor may have
privileges under the
laws of the United
Kingdom that could be
asserted
by the Debtor
in the UK Action. See
Privilege Order, at sec.
9. The Debtor has thus
withheld
this document
from
production for the
express purpose of
ensuring that he is
preserving, and not
waiving, any privilege
that he may have
to
assert against production
or disclosure of the
same document in the
UK Action. |\n|-------------------------|---------|------------------|-------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| BR_
KWOK
00011133 | 5/10/22 | Brown
Rudnick | Email | William R.
Baldaga, Esq.,
Melissa Francis,
Esq., Bennett
Silverberg,
Esq.,
Jeffrey
Jonas, Esq.,
taxelrod@
brownrudnick.c | Advice
concerning
effect
of
dismissal
of
bankruptcy
case on
future
bankruptcy | Attorney-Client | The privileged advice in
the redacted portion
of
the email does not relate
to Investigation
Topics
as that term is defined in
the Privilege Order and
no showing of personal
harm is required to
withhold the document |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1061-1 Filed 11/02/22 Entered 11/02/22 16:17:29 Page 12 of 12\n\n| om (BCC), | filings. | on the basis of attorney |\n|---------------|-------------|--------------------------|\n| kaulet@brownr | (requires | client privilege. |\n| udnick.com | redaction). | |\n| (BCC) | | |","body_zh":null,"key_entities":["Kwok","Je"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":2917,"status":"published","published_at":"2022-11-02 00:00:00","created_at":"2022-11-02","updated_at":"2026-07-07 07:47:33"}