|
2220 In a letter to a business competitor threatening an unfair competition action for pirating employees, a statement about the criminal record of one of the allegedly pirated employees was not sufficiently relevant to the contemplated litigation to be protected by the litigation privilege.CitationNGUYEN v PROTON (Irrelevant Accusation) 69 CA4 140 [See: CivC 47(b); Edwards v Centex 53 CA4 15, T/AT 4/97; Aronson v Kinsella 58 CA4 254, T/AT 11/97; Pettitt v Levy 28 CA3 484; Silberg v Anderson 50 C3 205; Rubin v Green 4 C4 1187, T/AT 5/93]
|
|
