Matthew DellaBetta of Kelley | Uustal. Courtesy photo An End to DOJ Privilege Review? Trump Lawsuit Signals Shifting Court Attitudes
Trump's lawyers successfully obtained the appointment of a special master to review potentially privileged materials seized by the government. This means that a neutral third-party, and not the government, will now determine what materials the government can use in its investigation.
September 30, 2022 at 09:51 AM
5 minute read
The search of former President Donald Trump's residence has generated extensive commentary about the Department of Justice's criminal investigation and the legal challenge that Trump's lawyers brought regarding that search. Trump's lawyers successfully obtained the appointment of a special master to review potentially privileged materials seized by the government. This means that a neutral third-party, and not the government, will now determine what materials the government can use in its investigation. Although the Eleventh Circuit recently granted a partial stay of the district court's order, the decision addressed the special master's review of classified documents the government seized, and not privileged materials such as attorney-client communications. Regardless of the ultimate resolution of those issues, the fact remains that the appointment of the special master reflects a shift in how courts are beginning to consider the government's review of privileged materials.
This content has been archived.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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Rogge Dunn Represents Florida Trucking Firm in Civil RICO Suit Against Worldwide Express
4 minute read
Navigating Claims Under the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act and Florida Telemarketing Act
4 minute read
Secrecy Or Prejudice: Panelists Debate Transparency in Litigation Financing Arrangements
Big Law Assembles as Cruise Lines Clinch Partial Victory in $439M Havana Docks Suit
Trending Stories
- 1TikTok Law and TikTok Politics
- 2California Supreme Court Vacates Murder Conviction in Infant Abuse Case
- 3New York’s Proposed Legislation Restraining Transfer of Real Property
- 4Withers Hires Lawyers, Staff From LA Trusts and Estates Boutique
- 5To Speed Criminal Discovery, NY Bill Proposes Police-to-Prosecutor Pipeline For Records
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
