Don Kirshner, and Schumaier, Roberts & McKinsey v. Uniden Corporation of America

Good Law
842 F.2d 1074·1988 WL 22232·10 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 921·1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3478
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 18, 198887-5838California4,529 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alarcon, J.

The law firm of Schumaier, Roberts & McKinsey (Schumaier) is counsel for Don Kirshner (Kirshner), the plaintiff in the underlying action for personal injuries. Schu-maier challenges the district court’s authority to enter a protective order requiring Schumaier to return to defendant Uniden Corporation of America (Uniden) certain documents, protected by the attorney-client privilege, that Schumaier obtained through discovery in a separate action filed by another of Schumaier’s clients against Uni-den. Schumaier also contends that the district court’s imposition of sanctions denied Schumaier due process.

We begin with a recitation of the pertinent facts. We then address two preliminary matters raised by Uniden: We grant Uniden’s motion to strike portions of Schu-maier’s Excerpts of Record; and we reject Uniden's argument that our previous denial of Schumaier's Petition for Writ of Mandamus bars Schumaier from challenging the protective order on this appeal.

On the merits of Schumaier’s appeal, we hold that the district court abused its discretion in issuing a protective order purporting to restrict the use of documents obtained in a separate action. Accordingly, we vacate the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.