Solis v. Food Employers Labor Relations Ass'n

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that under the duty rationale, “courts have concluded that the ERISA fiduciary’s duty to act in the exclusive interest of beneficiaries supersedes the fiduciary’s right to assert attorney-client privilege.”
• collecting cases recognizing the exception to assertions of attorney-client privilege by ERISA fiduciaries in the context of ERISA enforcement actions
• collecting cases in which the court held that the government may assert the fiduciary exception in an ERISA enforcement action
• concluded there was no legitimate basis on which to distinguish between the “two privileges” in the application of the fiduciary exception in the ERISA context”
• the party claiming the privilege bears the burden of demonstrating its applicability to the withheld communications
• “As in the case of attorney-client privilege, the party claiming the protection bears the burden of demonstrating the applicability of the work product doctrine.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).