ELR Citation: ELR 20936
No(s). CV 91-6446-WDK(Mcx) (C.D. Cal. Apr 12, 1994)

The court holds that environmental audit memoranda prepared by company personnel to assist the company's attorneys in evaluating its compliance with environmental laws and regulations are protected by the attorney-client privilege. The court thus denies a motion to compel production of the audit documents. The court holds that the defendant met its burden of proving the applicability of the attorney-client privilege under the test set forth in United States v. United Shoe Machinery Corp., 89 F. Supp. 357 (D. Mass. 1950). The circumstances indicate that the defendant company was a client that communicated confidential information to the attorneys for the purpose of securing an opinion of law. The court also holds that letters exchanged by codefendants' counsel are protected under the joint defense privilege, because communications by a client to the client's lawyer remain privileged when the lawyer subsequently shares them with codefendants for purposes of a common defense. Finally, the court holds that notes taken by defendant's counsel in preparation for defense in this action are privileged work product.

Counsel not available at this printing.