OC Register: Angels attorneys fight subpoena for privileged documents in overdose death of Tyler Skaggs

[AngelsWin.com]

The Los Angeles Angels organization is fighting a federal subpoena that it claims is a “fishing expedition” for privileged documents as prosecutors prepare for trial of the former team executive charged in the overdose death of pitcher Tyler Skaggs

In court documents filed late Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Fort Worth, Texas, the Angels protested the subpoena, saying the team is fully cooperating with the investigation into Skaggs’ death and has voluntarily provided “almost one million pages” of documents related to the case.

Former Angels communications director Eric Kay has been charged with supplying the drugs that killed Skaggs before a game with the Texas Rangers on July 1, 2019.

“Angels Baseball produced to the government almost one million pages of documents related to (Skaggs) and Kay. Those documents included personnel files, medical records, policy manuals, all of Kay’s emails and documents from 2016 onward, and an image of Kay’s laptop computer,” said the filing by team lawyers Ariel A. Neuman and John H. Cayce. “Based upon the government’s public filings, it appears that many of those documents now form the basis for its prosecution.”

The Angels, they said, are not withholding evidence in Skaggs’ death, and prosecutors are engaged in a “fishing expedition” for documents protected by attorney-client privilege.

The team also noted it led prosecutors to a person identified only as “H.V.”

“Yet now the government asserts without evidence that there ‘must’ be more documents related to drug distribution,” said the Angels document. “The claim is baseless, and the government fails to meet its burden of specifically identifying relevant, admissible documents that would be responsive to the subpoena other that those protected by the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine.”

Nearly two months after Skaggs died in a hotel room in Southlake, Texas, the Tarrant County medical examiner announced the results of an autopsy indicating his body contained alcohol, fentanyl and oxycodone.

The Drug Enforcement Administration later determined that Kay had “a history of narcotic transactions, including several transactions wherein Kay acquired oxycodone pills for (Skaggs) and others from Kay’s source(s) and distributed these pills to (Skaggs) and others,” according to a federal affidavit. “Kay had multiple contacts with some of these source(s) in the days leading up to and surrounding (Skaggs) overdose death.”

Two weeks ago, prosecutors filed the motion asking the court to force Angels Baseball to turn over documents the team claimed were protected. Prosecutors said the team was using the confidentiality excuse to shield more evidence of “unlawful drug activity” that was found during an internal investigation.

In its response this week, the team said: “All Angels Baseball has withheld from the government is the identity of precisely which documents counsel reviewed, and which individuals counsel interviewed, because the documents counsel selected to review, and the people it chose to interview, reflect counsel’s strategy and mental impressions. That information is protected work product.”

View the full article

[oater]

Since internal investigations are generally protected under the attorney-client and attorney work product privileges, I am guessing the Angels win this motion.

 

[Revad]

Holy smokes we’re screwed again.

[Revad]

Not like the first time

[wopphil]

14 hours ago, oater said:

Since internal investigations are generally protected under the attorney-client and attorney work product privileges, I am guessing the Angels win this motion.

 

You an attorney? 

[Stradling]

3 minutes ago, wopphil said:

You an attorney? 

Does what he said sound accurate?

[Blarg]

4 minutes ago, wopphil said:

You an attorney? 

Like most on here, he graduated from the university of Google but hasn't passed the bar as of yet.

[gotbeer]

Sounds like they are fishing for bigger fish now that they have Kay.  Documents they provided probably doesn't indict anyone else, so they are looking for fishing for anything that the Angels talked about it internally.  

This is the problem with the feds.  Once they get a nibble, they won't stop till they get all the fish in the sea.  Even if they have to cast gill nets and use dynamite.  This is sounding more and more like a Samueli situation, where the prosecution loses sight of their case to make a name for themselves.  

[wopphil]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

Does what he said sound accurate?

I haven’t the slightest idea in this instance. I have no idea what documents they are fighting over. Application of these privileges depends on many factors - the document at issue, who created it, why they created it, upon whose direction they created it, what is the need for the other side to see it, etc. There probably isn’t just one category of documents at issue here, but probably a number of categories (with different privilege arguments associated with each). 

[bruin5]

3 hours ago, gotbeer said:

Sounds like they are fishing for bigger fish now that they have Kay.  Documents they provided probably doesn't indict anyone else, so they are looking for fishing for anything that the Angels talked about it internally.  

This is the problem with the feds.  Once they get a nibble, they won't stop till they get all the fish in the sea.  Even if they have to cast gill nets and use dynamite.  This is sounding more and more like a Samueli situation, where the prosecution loses sight of their case to make a name for themselves.  

This seems logical to me.  The Angels limited the documents to correspondence involving Kay.  It seems plausible that there may also have been correspondence between Carpino, Arte, and maybe their HR person.  However, it’s also likely that much if not all of that conversation may have included an attorney which would have made it privileged.  

[Taylor]

Sounds like something a company innocent of the charges brought against them would do.

[oater]

5 hours ago, wopphil said:

You an attorney? 

Yes, I am.  For those interested, here is one of the leading cases on the subject:

https://casetext.com/case/in-re-kellogg-brown-root-4

The basic holding:

"In the context of an organization's internal investigation, if one of the significant purposes of the internal investigation was to obtain or provide legal advice, the privilege will apply. That is true regardless of whether an internal investigation was conducted pursuant to a company compliance program required by statute or regulation, or was otherwise conducted pursuant to company policy. "

[Taylor]

39 minutes ago, oater said:

Yes, I am.

Oooh, the turf wars just got more interesting.

@cals vs. @wopphil vs. @oater

[bruin5]

1 hour ago, Taylor said:

Sounds like something a company innocent of the charges brought against them would do.

It’s not unrealistic that there were conversations at high levels of the organization.  You had a player die from an overdose caused by bad street drugs procured by a club employee.  I’m not saying that the conversations were bad, and the conversations that involved an attorney would not need to be released, but it doesn’t seem unreasonable to ask for that information (at least to me).  Whether you get it is up to the judge.  

[AngelsLakersFan]

2 hours ago, Taylor said:

Sounds like something a company innocent of the charges brought against them would do.

[Docwaukee]

1 hour ago, Taylor said:

Oooh, the turf wars just got more interesting.

@cals vs. @wopphil vs. @oater

[wopphil]

6 hours ago, Taylor said:

Sounds like something a company innocent of the charges brought against them would do.

Incorrect. You generally don’t want to disclose attorney client communications, regardless of whether you are right or wrong. It’s a matter of principle. You also don’t want to run the risk of waiving privilege as to other communications. 

[eligrba]

It’s what billionaires do to avoid transparency. What’s the problem?

[Jay]

18 hours ago, Taylor said:

Oooh, the turf wars just got more interesting.

@cals vs. @wopphil vs. @oater