Third Circuit --In Re: Grand Jury v.

No jurisdiction over discovery order privilege claim controversy until finding of contempt.

Exception to this affecting third party subpoenas to parties with not enough of a vested stake to risk contempt has not been narrowed in scope by recent Scotus holdings on finality of orders.

If privilege holder is capable of receiving documents and does not challenge to the point of contempt, it is a waiver of privilege.

Reasonable basis for belief in crime/fraud is enough to break the attorney-client privilege.

Trial court did not abuse discretion in finding that communications were used for crime/fraud.

Court did not err in denying the privilege for specific documents.

Concur/Dissent:  ACR is an imperfect agency - as client might not be able to demand return of documents when court issues subpoena, third-party exception should apply.

[Again, folks, this is a summary after a skim - entertainment purposes only.]

In Re: Grand Jury v.