Brunton v. Kruger
2014 IL App (4th) 130421
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- Striegel provided estate planning services to Helen and Gordon Kruger and received confidential information.
- Brunton, the Krugers’ daughter, contested Helen Kruger’s will and trusts as to validity.
- Brunton subpoenaed Striegel for estate planning documents; Striegel asserted section 27 privilege.
- Trial court denied production of estate planning documents but allowed tax documents; discovery order issued.
- Court later held waiver by personal representatives/heirs and a testamentary exception; contempt finding against Tibble vacated.
- Court affirmed discovery order in part and vacated contempt in part; appeal proceeding concluded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope of the accountant-client privilege | Brunton argues documents are privileged and not discoverable | Striegel argues privilege covers only certain accounting work | Privilege extends to estate planning information when confidential |
| Holder of the privilege | Privilege held by client to protect disclosure | Privilege naturally belongs to the CPA | Client hold scope; holder is the client, not the CPA |
| Testamentary exception applicability | Disclosures should be allowed in will-contest context | Disclosure harms confidentiality | Testamentary exception applies; disclosure permitted |
| Waiver by personal representative/ heirs | Waiver not properly triggered by estate actions | Heirs/personal representative waived privilege for estate's benefit | Waiver by personal representative/heirs valid; privilege waived |
Key Cases Cited
- Reda v. Advocate Health Care, 199 Ill. 2d 47 (2002) (contumacious contempt as a procedural vehicle for appeal)
- PepsiCo, Inc. v. Baird, Kurtz & Dobson LLP, 305 F.3d 813 (8th Cir. 2002) (limits of section 27 privilege; distinction between accounting for financial statements and other services)
- In re October 1985 Grand Jury No. 746, 124 Ill. 2d 466 (1988) (testamentary-like exceptions to privilege in will-related matters)
- Lamb v. Lamb, 124 Ill. App. 3d 687 (1984) (testamentary exception in will-contest context)
- Continental Illinois National Bank & Trust Co. of Chicago, 360 Ill. 454 (1935) (executor waiver implications for privileges in estate matters)
- Grand Jury, 124 Ill. 2d 470 (1988) (principles limiting confidentiality in light of litigation needs)
- McDonald’s Corp. v. Levine, 108 Ill. App. 3d 732 (1982) (evidentiary privileges are procedural rules; not substantive rights)
- Estate of Wilson, 416 A.2d 228 (D.C. 1980) (trustee/heirs' access to information in will-contest context)
- Fossler v. Schriber, 38 Ill. 173 (1865) (early authority supporting family/estate waiver concept)
- Stephens, § 1 (1960s) (discusses waiver by personal representatives in privilege)