Earlier this year, the Palm Beach Circuit Court encountered a unique and legally unprecedented issue: How should a court sanction an attorney who participates in the secret theft of a witness’s DNA?
In Peerenboom v. Perlmutter, et al., the court addressed a situation in which an attorney subpoenaed several individuals for deposition, solely for the purpose of surreptitiously collecting their DNA. The subpoenaed individuals had been accused of starting a hate mail campaign which targeted a prominent businessman in Palm Beach County. The individuals’ DNA samples were collected for the purpose of comparing them with traces of DNA left on the envelopes containing the hate mail.
This content has been archived.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]
