E. Dolden

The defendant brought a motion for the production of a confidential settlement agreement between the plaintiff and a third party.

The plaintiff and the third party opposed the motion, asserting settlement privilege.

The defendant argued that the monetary amount of the settlement must be disclosed to prevent the plaintiff from being overcompensated.

The court dismissed the motion, holding that settlement privilege applies and that it is premature to determine whether the overcompensation exception applies until liability is determined at trial.

The plaintiff bank brought a motion for partial summary judgment seeking a declaration that losses it sustained due to an employee's participation in a Ponzi scheme constituted a 'direct financial loss' under its fidelity bond.

The bank had settled multiple third-party claims after victims transferred funds to the bank based on fraudulent representations by the bank's employee.

The court held that the bank received the funds subject to a constructive trust, and suffered a direct financial loss when those funds were credited to unrestricted accounts controlled by the fraudster.

The court found this narrow issue of policy interpretation appropriate for partial summary judgment and granted the declaration.