Submission of Privileged or Work Product Materials to Court for In Camera Review Does Not Waive Applicable Protection

From Cobell v. Norton, 213 F.R.D. 69, 75 (D.D.C. 2003):

[T]he SEC maintains that the [defendant's] uninvited submission of the transcripts for the district court's in camera review was improper, and the resulting disclosure thus constituted waiver of the privilege. *** [W]e know of no case, and the SEC points to none, where the submission of privileged material to the court for in camera review in order to demonstrate the existence of a privilege has itself been held to constitute waiver. [Quoting SEC v. Lavin, 324 U.S. App. D.C. 162, 111 F.3d 921 (D.C. Cir. 1997)]

This Court is also unaware of any case in which the submission of privileged material for in camera review has been deemed to constitute a waiver of the asserted privilege. It would thus be illogical to find that a closely analogous situation -- namely, the submission of privileged documents to a judicial officer acting pursuant to the authority vested in him by court order -- resulted in a waiver of privilege.

Share this article:


Recent Posts