BigLaw firm doesn't have to turn over notes in GM ignition switch cases, judge rules
A federal judge in Manhattan has ruled that King & Spalding does not have to turn over internal notes and memos regarding defects in General Motors ignition switches.
U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled (PDF) last Wednesday, report the National Law Journal (sub. req.) and Reuters. Plaintiffs’ lawyers suing GM over the defect had claimed the crime-fraud exception exempted the documents from the protections of attorney-client privilege and the work-product doctrine.
Furman said there was probable cause that GM committed a crime by failing to disclose the defect, but plaintiffs had not shown the law firm documents were made with the intent to further any crime or fraud. As evidence of probable cause, Furman cited GM’s deferred prosecution agreement in which the automaker was accused of scheming to conceal material facts to federal regulators.
Most of the documents sought by plaintiffs’ lawyers related to King & Spalding’s advice to settle three cases involving car crashes. Though King & Spalding recommended confidential settlements, there was no evidence that the intent was to conceal the defect from the public and regulators, Furman said.
King & Spalding spokeswoman Micheline Tang emailed a statement on the decision to the National Law Journal. “King & Spalding lawyers did exactly what one would expect ethical and diligent litigators to do on behalf of their client throughout the course of evaluating and defending individual accident claims,” Tang wrote. “Judge Furman’s detailed analysis unequivocally confirms that view.”
