Jo Ann Howard and Associates, P.C. et al v. Cassity et al

Filing 1477

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for In Camera Review [ECF No. 1439] is HELD IN ABEYANCE, pending receipt of a Status Report provided by Plaintiff. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall file a Status Report regarding Plaintiffs Motion for In Camera Review, within ten (10) days of this Order. (Response to Court due by 4/7/2014.) Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on March 27, 2014. (MCB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

JO ANN HOWARD &
ASSOCIATES, P.C., et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
J. DOUGLAS CASSITY, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:09CV01252 ERW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court upon “Plaintiffs’ Motion for In Camera Review”
[ECF No. 1439].
In an Order dated September 18, 2013, this Court, after weighing the severity of waiving
the privilege afforded attorney-client communications against the conduct of certain defendants
during the course of discovery in this matter, found that waiver of privilege concerning
documents possessed by the Wittner Defendants, among others, was appropriate [ECF No.
1279]. The Court ordered any attorney/client privilege that had been asserted concerning all
documents listed in a 47-page privilege log, prepared by Wittner Defendants on behalf of Forever
Defendants, and produced to Plaintiffs, be waived, and directed Wittner Defendants to provide
revised responses to Plaintiffs’ Requests for Production, removing all objections and otherwise
complying with the Court’s directions in its June 24 Order. The Court reaffirmed this ruling on
November 13, 2013, when it denied the Wittner Defendants’ motion to reconsider and request for
clarification; however, the Court stated it was “willing to conduct an in camera review, upon a
sufficient showing of the applicability of the attorney-client privilege” [ECF No. 1340].

In their Motion, Plaintiffs report that, in response to the Court’s November 13, 2013
Order, the Wittner Defendants sent a revised privilege log, containing 306 entries involving
twenty entities and seven individuals, to all parties on December 27, 2013 [ECF No. 1439-2].
Plaintiffs move the Court to conduct an in camera review of documents listed on the Wittner
Defendants’ revised privilege log. Plaintiffs state that many documents listed on the revised log
either do not appear to be privileged; were disclosed to third parties, or involve defunct entities.
Plaintiffs further state the Wittner Defendants do not oppose the relief requested in this motion,
and, upon the Court’s request, will produce the documents to the Court for its review. Wittner
Defendants did not file a response to Plaintiffs’ Motion.
On March 10, 2104, Plaintiffs filed a Stipulated Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice of
Complaint against Wittner Defendants, and on March 12, 2014, this Court, in accordance with
the parties’ stipulation, dismissed with prejudice, all claims against the Wittner Defendants [ECF
Nos. 1446, 1449]. In light of the events occurring in the interim since Plaintiffs’ Motion for In
Camera Review was filed, the Court hereby directs Plaintiffs to file a Status Report regarding the
viability or mootness of their Motion, indicating whether the issue was resolved during the
negotiations leading to the voluntary dismissal with prejudice.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that “Plaintiffs’ Motion for In Camera Review” [ECF No.
1439] is HELD IN ABEYANCE, pending receipt of a Status Report provided by Plaintiff.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall file a Status Report regarding

2

“Plaintiffs’ Motion for In Camera Review,” within ten (10) days of this Order.
Dated this

27th

day of March, 2014.

E. RICHARD WEBBER
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3