Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled July 25, 2025

Hall v. Google LLC

Judge
Jon Tigar
Docket
4:23-cv-06574
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2

Counsel9 of record
PLAINTIFF
JBA Bernard Alexander , III Alexander Morrison + Fehr LLP
Britt Karp Alexander Morrison + Fehr LLP
Toni J. Jaramilla Toni Jaramilla, A Professional Law Corporation
DEFENDANT
Aaron L. Agenbroad JONES DAY
Liat Leah Yamini JONES DAY
Renee Pauline Tiongson Perez JONES DAY
Annabel Pollioni Duane Morris LLP
Brandon Patrick Rainey Duane Morris LLP
Katherine C. Huibonhoa Duane Morris LLP

Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate and have been consolidated across spelling variants.

DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hall v. Google LLC, Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse allowed Jalon R. Hall to keep spiritual-advice text messages redacted during discovery.

Who this affects

Jalon R. Hall, who did not have to produce unredacted versions of the specified text messages.

What happened

Hall v. Google LLC concerns text messages between Jalon R. Hall and her father, an ordained minister. Hall claimed that some messages were protected by the clergy-penitent privilege.

After reviewing the newly found messages privately, the court said the redacted portions were plausibly protected because they contained spiritual advice or counseling. The court also said the messages did not relate to any party’s claim or defense, so Hall did not have to produce unredacted versions.

Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse issued the discovery order on July 25, 2025.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Hall v. Google LLC · No. 4:23-cv-06574
Judge
Jon Tigar
Date
July 25, 2025

Background

Jalon R. Hall invoked the clergy-penitent privilege for text messages with her father, who is an ordained minister. In an earlier review, the court held that most of the messages then at issue were not protected and ordered Hall to produce them.

Hall later found additional messages with her father. She redacted portions of those messages and submitted them for the court’s private review, again invoking the clergy-penitent privilege. The messages at issue were identified as HALLO001068–73.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that federal common law protects a confession made by a person to a minister acting in that capacity when the person seeks spiritual help. The court found that Hall had redacted only messages in which her father offered spiritual advice or counseling. Because of their content, the court said the redacted messages were plausibly protected by the privilege.

The court added that, even if the privilege did not apply, the messages were not relevant to any party’s claim or defense under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1).

Ruling

The court ordered that Hall did not have to produce unredacted versions of the redacted messages. Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse issued the discovery order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.