10 results for 'cat:"Government" AND cat:"Privilege"'.
J. Quereshi grants, in part, an estate’s motion to compel in this wrongful death of the decedent with mental illness. The estate alleges that the county’s police department failed to produce the internal affairs memoranda, demand documents and other communications concerning the shooting of decedent or similar cases. The police department opposes the motion, asserting the deliberative process and attorney-client privileges. The court previously found that the memorandum did not include any communications between the attorney and others and ordered the release of the material. Therefore, the production of a redacted and unredacted previous memorandums and materials must be released in its entirety along with documents of similar incidents.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Quereshi, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 8:22cv856, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities - Other - Civil Rights, Categories: government, Wrongful Death, privilege
J. Jackson grants the Department of Energy's motion for summary judgment in the nonprofit's Freedom of Information Act suit seeking information on an ethics matter involving a former deputy assistant secretary. Documents withheld in the Department's original response to the nonprofit's FOIA request fell under an exemption for attorney work product, attorney-client privilege and deliberate process privilege. The privacy interest involved in the redaction of two documents related to a conflict of interest outweighs any public interest in those documents.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Jackson, Filed On: March 30, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv2486, NOS: Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) - Other Suits, Categories: government, Privacy, privilege
J. Seeley finds the lower court properly determined the log created by the town employee regarding allegations of misconduct against the former chief of police was a public document subject to disclosure following a Freedom of Information Act request. The conduct of the chief, which led to administrative leave and his eventual retirement, is undoubtedly a matter of public concern and was received by a public agency when the employee transferred it to the city manager. Additionally, even though the log was given to the town attorney to formulate a plan regarding the chief of police, it was created as a series of personal observations and not for seeking legal advice. Therefore, the lower court properly determined it was not protected by attorney-client privilege. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Seeley, Filed On: March 1, 2024, Case #: AC45885, Categories: government, Public Record, privilege
J. Furman finds the newspaper is entitled to an audio copy of the Aurora city council's executive session because the public received insufficient notice about the meeting, which also included an official action in the form of a roll call vote to censure a member for comments made on a public radio station. Although the city discussed legal advice with its attorneys during the session, it waived attorney-client privilege when it attempted to correct the open meetings violations at the next council meeting and produced an agenda from the executive session. Reversed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Furman, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 2023COA118, Categories: government, Public Record, privilege
J. Rao finds the district court needs to take another look at communications on Representative Scott Perry’s phone, which was seized following allegations he used it to discuss fraud in the 2020 election, and determine whether certain messages are privileged. Certain acts of informal factfinding may be privileged under the Speech or Debate Clause. Vacated in part.
Court: DC Circuit, Judge: Rao, Filed On: September 13, 2023, Case #: 23-3001 , Categories: Elections, government, privilege
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Ecker finds the lower court properly upheld the Freedom of Information Commission's order requiring the department of mental health services to provide certain investigative documents to the media outlet. Although the documents were related to a patient, they did not deal with the diagnosis or treatment of any disorder and, therefore, were not exempt from disclosure. The police report requested by the media after the patient's death was not part of the patient's clinical file, and while certain sensitive personal information and names of other patients are required to be redacted, the report is not a privileged communication and was properly disclosed. Affirmed in part.
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court, Judge: Ecker, Filed On: August 29, 2023, Case #: SC20686, Categories: government, Public Record, privilege
J. Reznik requires additional information before making a determination on discovery requests from M. Frank Higgins & Co. and third-party defendant Merchants National Bonding relating to the government's claim that the general contractor did not pay for extra work performed on behalf of the government for a public works project. Higgins and Merchants argue that their communications are subject to the common interest privilege and are not subject to discovery by the general contractor, but their seemingly blanket application for all communications does not apply as all communications between them cannot be subject to the common interest privilege.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Reznik, Filed On: August 17, 2023, Case #: 7:22cv9599, NOS: Miller Act - Contract, Categories: government, Discovery, privilege
Per curiam, the Supreme Court of Ohio finds that the lower court properly dismissed the petitioner's request for the production of unredacted documents from the law firm because the invoices sent to the township board of trustees were protected from disclosure under attorney-client privilege. The lower court conducted an in-camera inspection of the documents to ensure they were protected from disclosure, and because the petitioner cannot rebut the results of that inspection, he is not entitled to a writ of mandamus.
Court: Ohio Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: August 3, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2668, Categories: government, Public Record, privilege
J. Moeller finds that the trial court properly refused to unseal privileged correspondence between a city attorney and city manager regarding a taxpayer's challenge to city finances. Interdepartmental fund transfers did not violate statute or the state constitution and payments to private entities for golf course maintenance were properly contracted. The taxpayer lacked standing as an individual to challenge the city's provision of water for the golf course. However, the district court erred in finding the taxpayer did not meet the notice requirements of the Tort Claim Act, but since he sued in an individual capacity, the error is moot. Reversed in part.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Moeller, Filed On: July 10, 2023, Case #: 49667, Categories: government, privilege
J. Lehrmann finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of the University of Texas in a public information case filed by a media organization seeking documents related to a relationship between the university and a law firm that was hired by the institution to handle an external investigation. After the court of appeals ruled that the documents must be released, the university appealed, arguing that they were protected under attorney-client privilege. The university hired the law firm for legal services, thus the documents detailing the investigation and relationship are protected from disclosure. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Lerhmann, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 21-0534, Categories: government, Public Record, privilege