Featured Publications

52 Holland & Knight Partners Named Legal Elite by Florida Trend Magazine

FLORIDA – Fifty-two of the firm's partners have been named to Florida Trend magazine's 2008 Florida Legal Elite list. Holland & Knight has more Florida Legal Elite lawyers than any other law firm. The Florida Legal Elite are the top lawyers practicing in Florida, according to the results of the magazine's statewide attorney surveys.

More

Holland & Knight's National Aviation and Shipping Transportation Practice Receives a No. 1 Ranking by Chambers USA

NEW YORK – Holland & Knight's national aviation and shipping transportation practice has once again received a No. 1 ranking in New York and the nation from Chambers and Partners for the 2008 Chambers USA – America’s Leading Business Lawyers guide. Building on over 150 years of transportation experience, Holland & Knight has the largest and most geographically diverse maritime practice of any law firm in the United States.

More

Search Our Library

Search

  • Printer friendly
  • Email this page to a friend
  • Generate a PDF version of this page
Labor, Employment and Benefits
Newsletter - March 2000
 
In this Issue...
Attorney-Client Privilege Survives Failure to Follow Obscure EEOC Rule
 
March 1, 2000
 

An obscure EEOC rule governing investigative subpoenas requires that employers must notify the EEOC within five days of service of the subpoena if the employer objects to the request. In a recent case from the District of Columbia Circuit, EEOC vs. Lutheran Social Services (D.C. Cir. 1999), the EEOC sought access to a report prepared by attorneys for the employer, summarizing the results of an investigation into alleged violations of Title VII by its president. As a result of the law firm's investigation, the employer terminated the president. Some 10 months later, the EEOC began investigating sex discrimination claims against the employer and sought production of the report. Two weeks after issuance of the subpoena by the EEOC, the employer retained counsel who immediately objected to the subpoena.

The EEOC brought an action in district court for the purpose of requiring the employer to comply with the subpoena. The EEOC argued that the employer waived its claim that the report was protected by the attorney-client and work-product privileges by failing to comply with the EEOC rule requiring subpoena recipients to present any objections to the commission within five days of service.

The district court agreed with the EEOC and required the employer to turn over its privileged documents. The appeals court, however, found that the agency regulations concerning subpoenas were so obscure that the employer's failure to object within the five days was excusable. The appeals court particularly noted that at all times in its correspondence and communications with the EEOC, the employer asserted the privilege.

Even though the appeals court in this case found that the privilege had not been waived under the circumstances, employers should not rely on favorable but costly rulings from an appeals court to protect privileged documents. Instead, if an employer receives a subpoena from the EEOC, be prepared to act within five days of service to assert any objections to producing the requested documents. The fact that there was a strong dissent in the Lutheran Social Services case indicates that other circuits and judges might not be as generous as the D.C. Circuit in preserving the asserted privileges.

For more information please call Margaret Widman Dees at 1-888-688-8500.