Petroni v. DuBois
- Nelson Roman
- 7:19-cv-03823
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Petroni v. Blustein Shapiro Rich & Barone LLP, Judge Davison ordered 20 documents disclosed and sustained objections to producing the rest.
Petroni and the defendants, whose disputed documents were subject to the court’s privilege review and production order.
What happened
In Petroni v. Blustein Shapiro Rich & Barone LLP, Petroni challenged the defendants’ withholding of 47 documents based on attorney-client confidentiality. The defendants had listed and described the documents in a privilege log.
The court had previously denied without prejudice Petroni’s request to obtain the documents under an exception for communications related to wrongdoing. It then privately reviewed all 47 documents to consider whether a fiduciary-duty exception applied.
Judge Paul E. Davison ordered the defendants to produce 20 identified documents within five business days, finding that they were either not protected or could be disclosed under the fiduciary exception. The court sustained the defendants’ objection to producing the remaining documents.
The detailed version
- Petroni v. DuBois · No. 7:19-cv-03823
- Nelson Roman
- Aug. 7, 2020
Background
Petroni objected to the defendants’ withholding of 47 documents on attorney-client privilege grounds. Attorney-client privilege generally protects confidential communications between a lawyer and client. The defendants described the withheld documents in a privilege log.
The court held a hearing on July 23, 2020. At that hearing, it denied without prejudice Petroni’s request for disclosure under the crime-fraud exception, which can allow disclosure of otherwise protected communications connected to wrongdoing. The court reserved a decision on the fiduciary exception and ordered a private review of the 47 documents.
Ruling
After reviewing the documents, the court concluded that 20 documents—numbers 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 21, 22, 27, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 44, 45, and 47—were either not privileged or could be disclosed under the fiduciary exception. The court ordered those documents produced to Petroni within five business days.
The court sustained the defendants’ objection to producing the remaining documents listed on the privilege log. The opinion does not state a separate disposition of the previously denied-without-prejudice crime-fraud request beyond describing that earlier ruling.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.