Chevron Corporation v. Donziger

Background

On July 22, 2020, the court ordered special prosecutors to produce redacted excerpts from invoices submitted for their work and expenses in the case. Donziger then asked for copies of forms generated as part of the invoices or in response to them. He also asked the prosecutors either to produce additional documents or to explain individually why particular invoice entries should remain undisclosed.

Rulings

The court granted in part and denied in part Donziger’s requests.

For the first request, the court said it had reviewed each invoice, found the invoices to be in good order, and sent letters to the District Executive’s Office approving them for payment. The invoice-approval letters were attached as Appendix A.

For the second request, the court held that no disclosure beyond the information required by the July 22 order was warranted at that time. The court rejected Donziger’s argument that United States v. Suarez required disclosure of all information concerning public payment of attorneys in a criminal case unless the prosecutors made an individualized showing. The court explained that Suarez involved only narrow, basic information from Criminal Justice Act payment forms, not detailed invoices and supporting timesheets. The court therefore held that Suarez did not require the special prosecutors to justify withholding each timesheet entry individually.

The court stated that Donziger could renew his request for complete invoices after the case closed, when disclosure would no longer risk revealing trial strategy or violating prosecutorial work-product protection. The request was granted in part and denied in part, without prejudice to reapplication after the conclusion of the case.