In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Dated March 24, 2003 Directed to (A) Grand Jury Witness Firm and (B) Grand Jury Witness

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• sustaining attorney-client privilege objections to questions seeking the content of oral communications among public relations firm, client and her lawyers, or any combination thereof
• relying on witness affidavit, grand jury testimony, and in camera review of documents
• protecting attorney–client privilege and work product on a question-by-question and document-by-document basis “between and among a prospective defendant in a criminal case, her lawyers, and a public relations firm hired by the lawyers to aid in avoiding an indictment”
• “The Court initially required submission of the documents withheld by Firm on grounds of privilege for in camera inspection.”
• “That Target’s spouse was present during some of these conversations does not destroy any applicable privilege”
• privilege protects confidential communications between attorneys and public relations consultants hired by attorneys to assist in dealing with media when communications were directed at handling client’s legal problems

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).