Private Sector Subpoenas
Eastman-Chapman University Case
Major Issue: Whether a law professor can block his former employer, a university, from responding to a House committee subpoena by producing the professor’s emails and other documents related to the 2020 election and January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Case Status: Awaiting additional rulings.
Case Description: On January 18, 2022, the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol issued a subpoena to Chapman University requesting production of all documents and emails in its possession “attributable to Dr. John Eastman, that are related in any way to the 2020 election or the January 6, 2021 Joint Session of Congress” during the time period Nov. 3, 2020 to January 20, 2021. On January 20, 2021, Dr. Eastman filed suit to invalidate the House committee subpoena and block any document production by Chapman University.
Procedural Posture: The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Southern Division, where Chapman University is located. California District Judge David O. Carter was assigned to the case. On January 20, 2022, the same day the suit was filed, Judge Carter issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) and ordered expedited briefing. On January 26, 2022, the district court lifted the TRO, denied the request for a preliminary injunction, and upheld the House subpoena. The court also authorized Dr. Eastman to review the 19,000 documents that the university planned to produce and raise any privilege claims during the document production process. Dr. Eastman reviewed documents and claimed privilege over some, and the House Select Committee objected. After a March 8, 2022 hearing on the privilege claims, the District Court reviewed each of the 111 challenged documents. On March 28, 2022, the District Court found 10 documents to be privileged and ordered disclosure of the remaining 101 documents to House Select Committee.
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Southern Division, where Chapman University is located. Judge David O. Carter was assigned to Case No. 8:22-cv-00099-DOC-DFM. On January 20, 2022, the same day the suit was filed, Judge Carter issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) and ordered expedited briefing. On January 26, 2022, after receiving briefs from Dr. Eastman, Chapman University, and the House committee and holding oral argument, Judge Carter lifted the TRO, denied the request for a preliminary injunction, and upheld the House subpoena. The court also issued an order allowing Dr. Eastman to review the 19,000 documents that Chapman University planned to produce and create a privilege log asserting any attorney-client or attorney work product privilege claims. The parties disagreed over whether 111 documents sent or received by Dr. Eastman on his Chapman email account January 4-7, 2021 were privileged. The parties submitted briefs on the issue and the court set a hearing for March 8, 2022.
On March 28, 2022, the District Court issued an order on the privilege claims. The order examined whether privilege attached to each of the disputed documents, whether privilege was waived, and whether an exception applied. The court found that privilege attached to 13 documents. However, privilege was waived for two of those documents because they were made public by media disclosure and a court filing. Additionally, the court found that one memo fell within the crime-fraud exception, as it likely furthered the crimes of obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy to defraud the United States. The court found the remaining 10 documents to be protected and ordered Dr. Eastman to disclose the other 101 documents.
- Eastman Complaint against House committee & Chapman University (1-20-2022)(20 pages)
- Eastman application for temporary restraining order (TRO)(1-20-2022)(13 pages)
- Court order granting TRO (1-20-2022)(5 pages)
- Chapman University response to TRO request (1-21-2022)(5 pages)
- House committee opposition to TRO request (1-21-2022)(39 pages)
- Eastman reply supporting TRO request (1-23-2022)(30 pages)
- Eastman declaration supporting TRO request (1-23-2020)(3 pages)
- District Court order on document production & privilege log (1-24-2022)(2 pages)
- District Court order denying preliminary injunction (1-25-2022)(16 pages)
- District Court order on document production & privilege log (1-26-2022)(3 pages)
- District Court order on document production and privilege log (1-31-2022)(2 pages)
- House notice on document production & privilege claims (2-11-2022)(7 pages)
- Eastman response on document production & privilege claims (2-13-2022)(4 pages)
- District Court order on support for privilege claims, briefing, and hearing date (2-14-2022)(2 pages)
- Eastman Brief Supporting Plaintiff’s Privilege Claims (2-22-2022)(41 pages)
- Eastman Declaration Supporting Privilege Claims (2-22-2022)(14 pages)
- Eastman Filing-Engagement Letter dated 12-5-2020 (2-22-2022)(4 pages)
- Eastman Filing-Search Terms (2-22-2022)(2 pages)
- House Opposition to Plaintiff’s Privilege Claims and supporting documents (3-2-2022)(221 pages)
- Eastman motion for exculpatory information & continuance (3-4-2022)(7 pages)
- District Court order denying Eastman motion (3-4-2022)(3 pages)
- Eastman reply supporting privilege claims (3-7-2022)(27 pages)
- Eastman statement of disputed facts (3-7-20220(18 pages)
- Eastman evidentiary objections (3-7-2022)(87 pages)
- District Court order resolving privilege claims relating to Eastman documents (3-28-2022)(44 pages)
No proceedings to date.
No proceedings to date.