Abromavage v. Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.

Neil Abromavage (plaintiff) worked as a managing director for Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. (DBSI) (defendant). In 2015, fellow managing director Jason Gurandiano was accused of workplace discrimination, prompting an internal investigation. During the investigation, Abromavage said he had witnessed Gurandiano engaging in racist conduct. After the investigation resulted in Gurandiano’s termination, Abromavage claimed that his direct supervisors, who were friends of Gurandiano, retaliated against him. Abromavage filed a complaint with human resources, prompting another internal investigation. In-house counsel Christina Berti interviewed several witnesses and then issued a report concluding that Abromavage’s supervisors had not retaliated against him in violation of DBSI’s policies. After the investigation ended, Abromavage claimed that DBSI continued to retaliate against him in various ways, including by denying him a bonus and terminating him. Abromavage sued DBSI under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), claiming that DBSI unlawfully retaliated against him for reporting prohibited racial discrimination. Abromavage sought both compensatory and punitive damages. As a defense against punitive damages, DBSI argued that it was not liable for such damages because it had made a good-faith effort to comply with Title VII by implementing and following policies for preventing, detecting, and addressing prohibited discrimination and retaliation. In support of its good-faith defense, DBSI produced Berti’s interview notes from the retaliation investigation. However, DBSI refused to produce the ultimate report, arguing that the report was protected by attorney-client privilege and that the privilege had not been waived because DBSI was not directly relying on the report as support for its good-faith defense. Abromavage moved to compel production of the report.