Second, the Supreme Court sealing order does not apply to the business records of SLS, even if those records ultimately also ended up as exhibits in the OMH hearings. See generally United States v. Fisher, 425 U.S. 391, 403, 96 S.Ct. 1569, 48 L.Ed.2d 39 (1976) (attorney-client privilege does not extend to otherwise unprivileged business records merely because they were then turned over to counsel); In re Application to Quash Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum, 157 Misc.2d 432, 435, 597 N.Y.S.2d 557, 559 (Sup.Ct. N.Y. Cty. 1993); Matter of Bekins Storage Co., 118 Misc.2d 173, 180, 460 N.Y.S.2d 684, 691 (Sup.Ct. N.Y. Cty. 1983) (citing Jones v. Reilly, 12 Bedell 97, 105, 174 N.Y. 97, 66 N.E. 649 (1903)), mod. on other grounds, 94 A.D.2d 643, 463 N.Y.S.2d 349 (1st Dep't 1983), aff'd, 62 N.Y.2d 324, 465 N.E.2d 345, 476 N.Y.S.2d 806 (1984). See also Matter of Vanderbilt, 57 N.Y.2d 66, 76, 439 N.E.2d 378, 453 N.Y.S.2d 662, 668 (1982) (test of privilege is whether document was protected when in the client's possession, not attorney's).