It may have been the appearance of adult film actress Stormy Daniels that filled the courtroom of U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood of the Southern District of New York with spectators Monday. But it was Fox News host Sean Hannity—who wasn't there—who stole the show at the second hearing in the attempt by Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump's personal attorney, to slow down federal prosecutors' criminal investigation into his activities.

Cohen was ordered April 13 to produce the names and proof of the attorney-client relationships he asserted to the court that justified a temporary restraining order request. But on Monday, talk of a TRO faded as Cohen's attorneys with McDermott Will & Emery, partners Todd Harrison and Stephen Ryan, shifted their arguments towards the appointment of a special master, at minimum, to handle the process of determining what, if any, privilege was assertable in the documents seized by federal agents a week ago from Cohen's residences and personal effects.

In their filing to satisfy Wood's order, Cohen's attorneys pointed to three specific clients of Cohen's who his team expected privilege issues would arise. One was the president. Another was former GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy, who it was revealed earlier had to handle his own payoff of a former pornographic model. The other third person Cohen's attorneys attempted to persuade Wood shouldn't be made public, at the client's request.

Wood was unpersuaded, ordering Ryan to produce the name in open court. Cohen's third mystery client, it turned out, is Hannity. The reveal elicited a wave of gasps from the court room.

Hannity's unveiling was the high point of the nearly three-hour hearing where attorneys for Cohen and Trump continued to argue that Wood should, in the absence of an injunction, either allow the two clients to determine for themselves what potential documents were privileged or, in the alternative from Cohen's perspective, have a special master step in to mitigate the process.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas McKay, arguing for the government, said that it would not only be the most efficient process to have the government, through a filter or “taint” team, segregate documents and attorney work products that then would require review of the parties and potentially the ruling from the bench. But would keep the other parties, who had a vested interest in slowing down the process by overasserting privilege on material, according to McKay.

Spears & Imes partner Joanna Hendon argued that her client, Trump, continued to argue her client's privilege interest meant he should be allowed to review material related to him to make the first cut of potentially privileged material.

Hendon said the president did not see a special master as the solution.

“He objects to anyone but himself making the initial claim of privilege,” she told the court.

Ultimately, the hearing largely resolved issues of process. Wood set aside concerns made by Trump and Cohen's counsel, stating that the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office's “integrity is unimpeachable,” and that a filter team could likely be trusted to handle the sensitive material. She also said she was considering appointing a special master, potentially just to handle issues related to material connected to Trump.

However, first things being first, the government is expected to essentially pull everything into one place, digitally, so Cohen and Trump—as well as the Trump Organization—will be able to have access to it. From there, prosecutors are set to work with opposing counsel to come up with search terms ahead of the database of seized material heading to Cohen's team for parsing content related to the president to be handed over to his counsel.

No specific date was set for a future conference, but all sides agreed to brief Wood in the coming days about their progress.

Daniels, who was present in the court room, was accompanied by her private attorney, Michael Avenatti.