4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND BRETT KIMBERLIN Plaintiff, vs. PATRICK FREY Defendant. Civil Action No.: 8:13-CV-03059 (GJH) RESPONSE TO MOTION TO REVIEW WITHHELD DOCUMENTS (ECF 340) Defendant Patrick Frey, through the undersigned counsel, respectfully responds in opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Review Withheld Documents (ECF 340) as follows. 1. Your undersigned (TBG) proffers as a court officer that he conducted an individual review of the documents itemized in the privilege logs produced by Plaintiff in his Motion, and is the author of those privilege log spreadsheets by his own hand. 2. As discussed previously, Plaintiff Brett Kimberlin filed state-court litigation in 2012 in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Maryland against a number of predominantly conservative bloggers, media personalities and media business entitles. In addition to that prior litigation and this federal case now against now against Defendant Patrick Frey, Esquire, there exists a state-court case against most of the defendants dismissed previously by this Honorable Court under substantially similar counts. Case 8:13-cv-03059-GJH Document 353 Filed 02/24/16 Page 1 of 4

ECF 353

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

RICO Remnant LOLsuit

Citation preview

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

BRETT KIMBERLIN

Plaintiff, vs.PATRICK FREY

Defendant.

Civil Action No.: 8:13-CV-03059(GJH)

RESPONSE TO MOTION TO REVIEW WITHHELD DOCUMENTS (ECF 340)

Defendant Patrick Frey, through the undersigned counsel, respectfully responds in

opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Review Withheld Documents (ECF 340) as follows.

1. Your undersigned (TBG) proffers as a court officer that he conducted an

individual review of the documents itemized in the privilege logs produced by

Plaintiff in his Motion, and is the author of those privilege log spreadsheets by his

own hand.

2. As discussed previously, Plaintiff Brett Kimberlin filed state-court litigation in

2012 in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Maryland against a number of

predominantly conservative bloggers, media personalities and media business

entitles. In addition to that prior litigation and this federal case now against now

against Defendant Patrick Frey, Esquire, there exists a state-court case against

most of the defendants dismissed previously by this Honorable Court under

substantially similar counts.

Case 8:13-cv-03059-GJH Document 353 Filed 02/24/16 Page 1 of 4

2

3. A joint defense agreement exists among the Defendants in the aforementioned

cases for the efficient communication and the preservation of client resources and

attorney time, both pro bono and paid.

4. The communications identified in the privilege logs constitute joint strategic and

informational communications about the several pro se complaints filed by

Plaintiff Brett Kimberlin, and Defendant asserts that they are privileged

accordingly.

5. The communications identified therein occurred among the various counsel and

parties (including employees of corporate defendants) within that joint defense

agreement or otherwise regard materials intended for their strategic joint defense,

and are accordingly privileged.

6. The undersigned attorneys owe a fiduciary duty to other joint parties not to betray

those parties’ attorney-client privilege, and has so withheld the aforementioned

documents while creating, at meaningful effort, the privilege logs described

above.

7. Assuming arguendothat this Honorable Court may conduct an a review in

camera at this time in response to Plaintiff’s current motion for miscellaneous

relief (ECF 340), Defendant would respectfully question the net utility to judicial

economy of such an exercise.

8. Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court decline to conduct an in

camera review of the documents logged and withheld by Defendant as privileged.

That stated, your undersigned counsel participate in this case at the pleasure of the

Case 8:13-cv-03059-GJH Document 353 Filed 02/24/16 Page 2 of 4

3

Bench, and we remain this Honorable Court’s officers in compliance with any

Order of Court, now existing, future or potential.

WHEREFORE Defendant respectfully requests that this Honorable Court deny Plaintiff’s

request per ECF 340 (Motion for Miscellaneous Relief/to Review Withheld Documents) for an

in camera review of documents logged and withheld as privileged by Defendant.

Respectfullysubmitted,

/s/

____________________________ T. Bruce Godfrey #24596

Jezic & Moyse LLC 2730 University Blvd. West, #604 Silver Spring, MD 20902 240-292-7200 facsimile: (888) 241-3135 [email protected]

ARCHER & GREINERA Professional Corporation /s/By:________________________________ Ronald D. Coleman (Pro Hac Vice)Court Plaza South21 Main Street, Suite 353Hackensack, NJ 07601201- [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant Patrick Frey

Dated: February 24, 2016

Case 8:13-cv-03059-GJH Document 353 Filed 02/24/16 Page 3 of 4

4

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTRONIC FILING AND REGARDING WAIVER OF MAILINGS

I, T. Bruce Godfrey, hereby certify that I have filed a copy of this document with the

United States District Court electronically and by so doing have provided compliant notice to those parties who are registered with ECF through counsel as of this filing consistently with Local Rule 102.1(c) on February 24, 2016. All parties, including pro se parties, have agreed to accept service by electronic mail only and an electronic copy has been distributed to all parties.

/s/ _________________________________ T. Bruce Godfrey #24596

Case 8:13-cv-03059-GJH Document 353 Filed 02/24/16 Page 4 of 4