The rise and fall of Theranos and its founder, Elizabeth Holmes, was a gripping corporate drama. The resulting prosecution of Holmes and a co-defendant is now generating issues of interest for white-collar practitioners, as we discussed not long ago. See Elkan Abramowitz and Jonathan S. Sack, The Importance of ‘Particulars’ in Criminal Fraud Cases, N.Y.L.J. (March 3, 2020).

In this article, we address a dispute between the government and Holmes which concerns the admissibility of communications between Holmes and outside company counsel, Boies, Schiller Flexner (Boies). The government seeks to admit 16 documents to which Holmes has objected on the grounds of attorney-client privilege. The government has argued that Boies had an attorney-client relationship with the company, not with Holmes. Holmes has argued that Boies represented her personally, and consequently she retains a privilege that she will not waive.

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

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]