Williams v. District of Columbia
806 F. Supp. 2d 44
D.D.C.2011Background
- Williams, a DC whistleblower, claims retaliation under the DC Whistleblower Protection Act for testimony before the DC Council.
- District produced a 'recommendation to terminate' packet containing about 104 pages, including a two-page email about Williams's proposed termination, among the first ten pages.
- District later realized the email was inadvertently produced and sent a November 22, 2008 letter asking Williams to return the document and not use its contents.
- Williams did not respond to the notice and, over two years later, discovery proceeded and the parties filed various motions; no privilege log was produced and no timely rectification occurred.
- In July 2011, the District renewed a Motion to Exclude Williams's Exhibit 9A; the Court ordered briefing on steps to prevent disclosure and to rectify the inadvertent disclosure.
- The Court ultimately denied the District's motion, holding the District failed to prove it took reasonable steps to prevent disclosure or promptly rectify the error, and ordered Williams to file a notice detailing admissibility and intended use at trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the District take reasonable steps to prevent disclosure? | Williams | District | District failed; no reasonable precautions shown |
| Did the District promptly rectify the disclosure after discovery? | Williams | District | District failed; not promptly rectifying the error |
| Is Rule 502(b) applicable given the inadvertent disclosure and steps taken? | Williams | District | Rule 502(b) does not salvage District; waiver not established |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Sealed Case, 877 F.2d 976 (D.C.Cir. 1989) (attorney-client privilege must be jealously guarded; waiver concerns)
- Elliott v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 521 F. Supp. 2d 41 (D.D.C. 2007) (waiver limitations under Rule 502; inadvertent disclosure considerations)