If the Freeh report had been issued under any other name, would it have provided a greater degree of privilege for the underlying documents? According to at least one state Superior Court judge, it just might have.
During oral arguments Tuesday in Paterno v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, which focused on the discoverability of numerous documents the legal and investigative firms headed by Louis J. Freeh created when looking into Penn State’s reaction to reports of sex abuse, Judge Jack A. Panella said several times that if the Freeh report had been issued under the Penn State banner, all of the investigative documents would have clearly been privileged.
This content has been archived.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]
