Penemue LLC v. Stevens
2:22-cv-05093
E.D. La.Apr 14, 2025Background
- Penemue, LLC purchased a 46% tax title interest in certain property in Gretna, Louisiana at a 2018 tax sale, with the sale recorded in official records.
- Defendant Raylyn Stevens, Director of Finance and Tax Collector for the City of Gretna, later filed an affidavit to cancel that tax sale.
- Penemue filed suit seeking to quiet title and brought constitutional claims, following Stevens' actions.
- Discovery disputes arose when Stevens withheld a May 13, 2022 email (between city attorney Leblanc and CivicSource's COO) on attorney-client and work product grounds.
- Penemue moved to compel, challenging the assertion of privilege and timeliness of the response. Stevens opposed, maintaining privilege; Penemue replied.
- The Court ordered in camera review of the email before ruling on the motion to compel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Attorney-client privilege | CivicSource is not the client; privilege claim is too vague; privilege waived by late response | CivicSource is client rep; communication was for legal advice, privilege applies, and was timely asserted | In camera review required to determine applicability |
| Work product doctrine | Vague basis; not shown to be in anticipation of litigation | Email reflects legal strategy; prepared for litigation, protection applies | In camera review required to determine applicability |
| Waiver of privilege on untimely response | Objection waived by late privilege claim | Privilege was asserted timely; no waiver occurred | Timely enough under circumstances; no per se waiver |
| Adequacy of privilege log | Description lacked sufficient detail to test claim | Provided date, parties, subject – sufficiently invoked privilege | Log sufficient for preliminary review, but not dispositive |
Key Cases Cited
- Upjohn Co. v. United States, 449 U.S. 383 (Upholds broad construction of attorney-client privilege for corporations)
- Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 (Establishes protection of attorney work product in discovery)
- United States v. Robinson, 121 F.3d 971 (Burdens on party asserting privilege)
- Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (Scope of attorney-client privilege)
- United States v. El Paso Co., 682 F.2d 530 (Standards for attorney-client and work product privilege in discovery)