Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 19STCV15091, Date: 2022-08-23 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV15091    Hearing Date: August 23, 2022    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: August 23, 2022

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion for Protective Order to Maintain Privileged Designation

Moving Party: Plaintiffs Ahmad Keliddari and Rad-Zin Investment, LLC

Responding Party: Defendants Rodney T. Lewin, A Professional Corporation and Rodney Theodore Lewin, an Individual

T/R:     PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IS DENIED.

            PLAINTIFFS TO NOTICE.

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at¿SMCdept54@lacourt.org¿with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing. 

            The Court considers the moving papers, opposition, and reply.

“The court, for good cause shown, may make any order that justice requires to protect any party or other person from unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense.”  (CCP § 2031.060(b).)   

            This is an attorney malpractice and fraud action. Plaintiffs allege Defendants defrauded Plaintiffs of a $1.25 million investment. Today’s motion concerns the client file in the underlying action maintained by the attorney Defendants. The file was provided to Plaintiffs in a banker’s box containing over 2,000 pages of documents. Under the protective order in this case, Plaintiffs designated the entire banker’s box as attorney-client privileged. With this designation, the files cannot be filed in the public filing system, and instead must be lodged under seal.

            Plaintiffs move for an order to maintain the attorney-client privilege designation assigned to the banker’s box. In opposition, Defendants assert that none of the documents in the banker’s box are privileged because Plaintiffs waived the privilege by suing for Defendants for legal malpractice.

            Plaintiffs acknowledge that there are documents in the banker’s box that are not privileged, but they argue it is Defendants’ burden to identify which ones. Plaintiffs are incorrect. Plaintiffs may designate materials as privileged only if they reasonably believe the materials are privileged. The attorney-client privilege is narrow. Plaintiffs are the holders of that privilege. The parties cannot blanketly designate a box of documents privileged without examining the documents themselves. Plaintiffs must identify which specific documents are privileged. Defendants then may challenge the designation of documents they believe are not privileged.

            Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED.