Jablonski v. Special Counsel, Inc.
- Ona Wang
- 1:16-cv-05243
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Jablonski v. Special Counsel, Judge Wang denied Jablonski’s protective-order motion and ordered production of two deposition notebooks.
Terri Jablonski was required to produce the two notebooks she used during her deposition to Special Counsel, Inc.; the defendant was entitled to receive them.
What happened
In Jablonski v. Special Counsel, Inc., Terri Jablonski asked the court to prevent production of two notebooks she used during her deposition. She argued that the notebooks contained protected legal research, deposition summaries, and other attorney work product, and asked the court to review them privately before deciding what to disclose.
The court said the notebooks were initially protected as work product, but that protection was lost when Jablonski used them to refresh her memory while testifying. Because she consulted both notebooks during the deposition, the court ruled that they had to be produced to Special Counsel, Inc.
Judge Ona T. Wang denied the protective-order motion and directed Jablonski’s lawyer to bring both notebooks to Jablonski’s continued deposition on October 19, 2022, and give them to the defendant’s lawyer before the deposition began.
The detailed version
- Jablonski v. Special Counsel, Inc. · No. 1:16-cv-05243
- Ona Wang
- Oct. 18, 2022
Background
Terri Jablonski moved for a protective order concerning two notebooks used during her initial deposition on July 29, 2022. Jablonski argued that the notebooks contained privileged attorney work product, including legal research, deposition digests, and analysis that she had prepared in her role as a paralegal for the case. In the alternative, she asked the court to conduct a private review of the notebooks and remove any portions whose disclosure would waive protection.
Court’s Analysis
The court accepted Jablonski’s counsel’s description of the notebooks and declined to conduct a private review at that time. The court found that the work-product privilege initially applied to the notebooks. But under Federal Rule of Evidence 612(a)(1), materials a witness consults while testifying to refresh recollection must be produced to the opposing party. During the deposition, Jablonski confirmed that she was looking through one notebook to refresh her recollection. After reviewing the deposition video, the court found that both notebooks had been used during the deposition.
Ruling
Judge Ona T. Wang denied Jablonski’s motion for a protective order. The court ruled that both notebooks had to be turned over to Special Counsel, Inc. Jablonski’s counsel was directed to bring the notebooks to the continued deposition on October 19, 2022, and produce them to the defendant’s counsel before the deposition began. The Clerk of Court was directed to close ECF Nos. 237 and 242.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.