Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells – Attorney/client privilege

THE SCO GROUP, INC. Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant, v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION, Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff.

Civil No. 2:03CV0294

2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62980

September 1, 2006

Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells

My first comment on this case is that there are countless lawyers involved. It takes up a full page just to list all the lawyers.

Second comment is that the motion that prompted the order is docket no. 678!! Wow. Lots of lawyers billing lots of hours.  This post is not the place to outline the vast amounts of litigation involving SCO within the District of Utah. Maybe someday.

The present matter involves The SCO Group Inc.’s (SCO) Motion for In Camera Review of Allegedly Privileged Documents. IBM argues that the documents are protected by attorney-client privilege. SCO argues the documents are not privileged, should be produced and should be available for deposition of 30(b)(6) depositions.

The court held in favor of IBM and stated: “IBM has met its burden of establishing the applicability of the attorney-client privilege. And, the court further finds that the documents at issue are protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege. Therefore, the documents are not discoverable and do not need to be provided to SCO.”

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: Civil, Craig's commentary, Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: