Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher won motions in December to quash a subpoena of interview notes and metadata originating from its investigation of New Jersey’s Bridgegate scandal, but came in for some scathing criticism from the judge on the case.
Gibson Dunn’s motion to quash the subpoena by Bridgegate defendants William Baroni and Bridget Kelly—which sought the firm’s interview notes, transcripts and recordings from its internal investigation of the case—was granted because there was no evidence that additional materials responsive to the request exist. The firm’s motion to quash the defendants’ subpoena of metadata related to the investigation was also granted, based on a finding that the information is available from other sources.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
