Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> Northwest Business Litigation Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Litigation
: Northwest Business Litigation BlogSupreme Court limits review of attorney-client privilege orders
By Lori Bauman
The U.S. Supreme Court today held that a court's order compelling production of confidential information based on a waiver of the attorney-client privilege is not immediately appealable. As a result, a party seeking to protect privileged material in federal court may have to wait until after entry of judgment to obtain appellate review.
In Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, a former employee of Mohawk sued for wrongful termination and sought production of documents relating to a meeting he had with the company's lawyers. The District Court ordered production based on what it concluded was Mohawk's waiver of the privilege. When the court declined to certify the order for interlocutory appeal, the company filed an appeal under 28 USC sec. 1291, which gives the Courts of Appeal jurisdiction of final judgments and a limited class of prejudgment orders. The Supreme Court, citing the federal courts' preference for a "single appeal" in each case, agreed that the order compelling production of confidential material is not among those entitled to immediate appellate review, and affirmed dismissal.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for a unanimous Court, stated that a party disputing an order to produce materials based on a waiver of a privilege has several options short of producing the materials and waiting to raise the issue after entry of judgment. The party can, for example, ask the trial court to certify an interlocutory appeal (which the District Court refused to do in this case), or refuse to produce the disputed materials and incur court-imposed sanctions which would be subject to appeal after entry of judgment.
Justice Sotomayor noted that Congress, in the 1990 Rules Enabling Act, expressed an intention that the universe of appealable prejudgment orders be expanded, if at all, by rulemaking and not by court decision.
Full post as published by Northwest Business Litigation Blog on December 08, 2009 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Power of Attorney and Living Wills for the aged
Options for caring for aging parents
Missouri Attorney General's Office
$26,000 settlement reached in disability discrimination lawsuit, pending court approval.
Daimler Chrysler et al.
alleged negligence pertaining to lost confidential client data which exposed customers to identity theft
Greka Oll and Gas
EPA Orders Clean-up of Toxic PCBs
FDA Issues Update on Safety Review Orlistat
Orlistat FDA Issues Update on Safety Review
Aurora Loan Faces Class Action over Mortgage Review Services
Aurora Loan Faces Class Action over Mortgage Review Services
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million

Supreme Court rules no immediate right to appeal disclosure orders
Court Says No Immediate Appeal for Attorney-Client Privilege
President Signs New Attorney-Client Privelege Rule








