Privilege & work product

Miller UK Ltd. v. Caterpillar, Inc.

U.S. District Court, N.D. Ill. · US (IL) · 2014 · Decided

Citation/Docket: 17 F. Supp. 3d 711 (N.D. Ill. 2014)

Parties & Funders

Posture: Defendant sought funding documents in discovery
Funder(s) involved: (Funder identity confidential)

Background

Caterpillar sought Miller's litigation funding documents, arguing champerty and relevance. The leading early U.S. opinion on funding discovery.

Holding & Outcome

Court rejected the champerty attack and held materials shared with funders under NDA retained work-product protection, though the funding agreement itself was not privileged as a communication.

Practical Lesson

Use NDAs and common-interest frameworks before sharing evaluative materials with funders; assume the agreement itself may be discoverable even where deal communications are protected.

Matters like this one often turn on expert testimony, on valuation, industry custom and practice, legal ethics, or damages. The Institute partners with world-class expert witness referral companies for this purpose.

Compiled from public sources (court filings, published opinions, and secondary reporting) as part of the Institute's Phase 1 Dispute Library research. This is educational material, not legal advice; case citations should be independently verified before relied upon.

← Back to the Dispute Library