Vazquez v. Mayorkas
- Joseph Spero
- 3:18-cv-07012
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Vazquez v. Mayorkas, Judge Spero denied Tonette Vazquez’s counsel-and-time motion and upheld waiver of attorney-client privilege over settlement communications.
Tonette L. Vazquez, who represented herself, and Alejandro Mayorkas; the ruling also concerned communications between Vazquez and her former attorneys about the purported settlement.
What happened
In Vazquez v. Mayorkas, Tonette L. Vazquez, who was representing herself, asked the court to appoint a lawyer and extend her deadline. The court denied that motion for the reasons given in its earlier order denying a similar request.
Vazquez also challenged the court’s conclusion that she had waived attorney-client privilege for communications about the alleged settlement. She said her former lawyers entered the settlement without authorization and pressured her to accept it.
The court explained that raising those issues put her communications with her former lawyers directly at issue, so the privilege was waived. Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero therefore denied the motion and maintained the privilege ruling.
The detailed version
- Vazquez v. Mayorkas · No. 3:18-cv-07012
- Joseph Spero
- June 17, 2021
Background
Tonette L. Vazquez, representing herself, moved for appointment of counsel and an extension of time. The court denied the motion based on the reasons stated in its March 3, 2021 order, which had denied a similar motion.
Attorney-Client Privilege
Vazquez also objected to the court’s determination that she waived attorney-client privilege concerning communications about the purported settlement. Attorney-client privilege generally protects confidential communications between a client and the client’s lawyer. The court stated that the privilege cannot be used both as a shield and as a sword.
Vazquez asserted that her then-attorneys entered into a settlement agreement without her authorization and pressured her to accept it. The court concluded that these assertions put her communications with those attorneys directly at issue. Under those circumstances, the court held that the attorney-client privilege was waived.
Disposition
The court denied the motion for appointment of counsel and an extension of time. It also maintained its determination that Vazquez had waived attorney-client privilege concerning communications with her former attorneys about the purported settlement. The order was signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.