In an options backdating prosecution of a former Broadcom executive, the district court's order suppressing all evidence reflecting defendant's statements to attorneys from Broadcom's outside counsel regarding the stock option granting practices at Broadcom is reversed where, by approaching the exclusion question with a presumption that the privilege attached, the district court inverted the burden of proof, improperly placing the onus on the government to show what information was not privileged.
Read US v. Ruehle, No. 09-50161
Appellate Information
Argued and Submitted September 1, 2009
Filed September 30, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Tallman
Counsel
For Appellant:
Daniel B. Levin, Gregory W. Staples and Andrew D. Stopler, United States
Attorney's Office, Los Angeles, CA
For Appellee:
Matthew D. Umhofer, Richard Marmaro and Matthew E. Sloan, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Los Angeles, CA
