Assertion of Claim of Privilege

(a) Unless otherwise agreed to by the parties or directed by the court, where a claim of

privilege is asserted in objecting to any means of discovery or disclosure, including

but not limited to a deposition, and an answer is not provided on the basis of the

assertion,

(1) The person asserting the privilege must identify the nature of the privilege

(including work product) which is being claimed and, if the privilege is

governed by state law, indicate the state’s privilege rule being invoked; and

(2) The following information must be provided in the objection, or (in the case

of a deposition) in response to questions by the questioner, unless divulgence

of the information would cause disclosure of the allegedly privileged

information:

(A) For documents (including electronically stored information): (i) the type

of document, e.g., letter, email, or memorandum; (ii) the general subject

matter of the document; (iii) the date of the document; and (iv) the

author of the document, the addressees of the document, and any other

recipients, and, where not apparent, the relationship of the author,

addressees, and recipients to each other;

(B) For oral communications: (i) the name of the person making the

communication and the names of persons present while the

communication was made and, where not apparent, the relationship of

25

Joint Local Rules, S.D.N.Y. and E.D.N.Y. Effective January 2, 2026

the persons present to the person making the communication; (ii) the

date and place of communication; and (iii) the general subject matter of

the communication.

(b) Where a claim of privilege is asserted in response to discovery or disclosure other

than a deposition, and information is not provided on the basis of the assertion,

the information set forth in paragraph (a) above must be furnished in writing at

the time of the response to the discovery or disclosure, unless otherwise agreed to

in writing by the parties or ordered by the court.

(c) Efficient means of providing information regarding claims of privilege are

encouraged. Parties are encouraged to discuss measures that further this end,

including which information fields will be provided in the privilege log. When

appropriate, parties should consider and discuss the use of a categorical log or a

metadata log, instead of a document-by-document log. Unless otherwise agreed to

by the parties or provided by a judge’s individual practices or by court order,

(1) when a party is asserting privilege on the same basis with respect to multiple

documents, it is presumptively proper to provide the information required by

this rule by group or category;

(2) where numerous documents are withheld and the party is using review

software, preparation of a metadata log may suffice to provide the

information required to support the claim of privilege;

(3) where either a categorical log or a metadata log is used, the parties are

encouraged to discuss whether to allow the requesting party to request a

document-by-document log for a limited number or percentage of the logged

documents; and

(4) a party cannot object to a privilege log solely on the basis that it is a

categorical log or a metadata log but may object if the substantive

information required by this rule has not been provided in a comprehensible

form.

For relevant historical context for this local rule, consult the Appendix of Committee Notes.

26

Joint Local Rules, S.D.N.Y. and E.D.N.Y. Effective January 2, 2026