In Re Two Grand Jury Subpoenae Duces Tecum Dated August 21

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that records relating to law firm's fee arrangements with, and disbursements on behalf of, their clients were not protected by the attorney-client privilege
• finding collective entity rule applicable to two-person law firm, despite lack of partnership agreement and lack of partnership tax returns
• finding collective entity rule applicable to two-person law firm, despite lack of partnership agreement and lack of partnership tax returns
• “[Bjecause the records must be kept by law, the record-holder ‘admits’ little in the way of control or authentication by producing them.”
• “The rationale behind the [“required records”] exception ... [in part is that] the record-holder ‘admits’ little in the way of control or authentication by producing them.”
• “[B]ecause the records must be kept by law, the record-holder ‘admits’ little in the way of control or authentication by producing them.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).