In re Motion to Quash Bar Counsel Subpoena
Maine Supreme Judicial Court
982 A.2d 330 (2009)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
The law firm of Verrill Dana LLP (the firm) (plaintiff) hired Gene Libby, the firm’s general counsel, to investigate claims that one of the firm’s partners had stolen client funds. Libby gathered evidence and wrote memos detailing his findings. Libby then resigned from the firm and told the Maine bar that he believed he had unprivileged information to report. However, Libby did not provide specifics because he acknowledged that the firm believed that the information was protected by the attorney-client privilege. The bar’s counsel (defendant) issued a subpoena to Libby to provide the information and supporting documents. The firm moved to quash the subpoena, and the parties agreed to have a justice on the Maine Supreme Judicial Court decide the dispute. The justice reviewed the questioned documents in camera, i.e., in a protected chambers proceeding. The justice found that Libby might have discovered criminal conduct by partners at the firm. The judge then ruled that the crime-fraud exception applied to allow disclosure of the attorney-client communications and denied the motion to quash the subpoena. The firm appealed to a full panel on the Maine Supreme Judicial Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mead, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.