More Documents on In re United States

Original opinion here.

Court of Federal Claims opinion in Jicarilla Apache Nation v. United States, denying the U.S.’s motion to stay here.

United States petition for rehearing here.

Navajo Nation and Pueblo of Laguna Amicus opposing rehearing here.

United States petition to extend filing deadline for a writ of certiorari here.

United States Petition for Rehearing in In re United States

Here: In re United States Petition for Rehearing

Recall that the question involved is whether the United States can avoid producing certain documents in the Jicarilla Apache v. United States case (materials here).

Jicarilla Apache Tribe v. U.S. — Attorney-Client Privilege Dispute Headed for Supreme Court?

Jicarilla Apache Tribe sued the U.S. in 2002 in the Court of Federal Claims and later asked for inter-agency federal documents where the government claimed an attorney-client privilege. The court disagreed and ordered the production of certain documents. This order here denies the government’s motion for a stay while it petitions to the Federal Circuit for a mandamus order. Now apparently it wants more time to file a cert petition in the Supreme Court.

Order on Motion to Stay

And here is the Federal Circuit’s order.

Federal Circuit Adopts Fiduciary Exception to Atty-Client Privilege in Tribal Trust Cases

One would expect a cert petition from the United States in the new year on this one.

In re United States.

An excerpt:

The United States petitions for a writ of mandamus to direct the Court of Federal Claims (“trial court”) to vacate its orders requiring the United States to produce documents that it asserts are protected by the attorney-client privilege. Jicarilla Apache Nation (“Jicarilla”) opposes. We hold that the United States cannot deny an Indian tribe’s request to discover communications between the United States and its attorneys based on the attorney-client privilege when those communications concern management of an Indian trust and the United States has not claimed that the government or its attorneys considered a specific competing interest in those communications. Accordingly, we adopt the fiduciary exception in tribal trust cases. Under the fiduciary exception, a fiduciary may not block a beneficiary from discovering information protected under the attorney-client privilege when the information relates to fiduciary matters, including trust management. Because we find that the trial court correctly applied the fiduciary exception to the United States’ privileged communications, we deny the United States’ petition for a writ of mandamus.