Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege and the Bankruptcy Trustee

When Corporate Attorney-Client Communication Is No Longer a Secret

Imagine if every secret and strategy that you had ever shared with your attorney were laid open for the world to see. A trustee in a business bankruptcy case may well have the power to review, publish, and wield all of the debtor’s attorney-client communication, including those communications that the debtor’s principals reasonably believed were permanently encased in a fortress of secrecy. The trustee can thus gain major ammunition for claims against insiders, business partners, vendors, attorneys, accountants, advisors, and others.

The trustee’s acquisition of the privilege can jeopardize the objectives that the debtor’s principals intended to achieve by filing the bankruptcy case. Damaging material could include:

• Information supplementing or even conflicting with disclosures in the debtor’s sworn schedules.
• Legal analysis of weaknesses concerning the debtor and its principals.
• Strategy for coordinating the bankruptcy case with other legal proceedings.
• Plans for dealing with significant creditors or assets.

What is Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege?

According to the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501 defines attorney-client privilege as the legal protection that a person has against disclosure of written or oral communications with the person’s attorney. In a legal proceeding, if a party seeks to compel a person to turn over letters, e-mails, or other communications that are protected by the attorney-client privilege, the person can refuse to turn them over.

In Upjohn Co. v. United States, 449 U.S. 383, 389 (1981), the court stated that this privilege “is the oldest of the privileges for confidential communications known to the common law,” and its purpose is “to encourage full and frank communication between attorneys and their clients and thereby promote broader public interests in the observance of law and administration of justice.”

The attorney-client privilege belongs to the client, although an attorney may assert the privilege on the client’s behalf. Such was the case in Sandra T.E. v. South Berwyn School District 100 (2009), in which the hired law firm, Sidley, argued that investigative interviews on behalf of the school district were protected under attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine, which protects documents prepared by a party and its legal representatives in anticipation of litigation.

However, there are limitations:

• Facts and factual results of an investigation cannot be privileged, however attorney advice and communication related to legal course of action can remain private.
• Privilege cannot be used to conceal a crime or fraud, as in the case of perjury or witness tampering.
• Communications must involve a lawyer as in the Sandra T.E. v. South Berwyn School District 100 case.

Importantly, this privilege is not limited to individuals but also applies to corporate attorney-client communication.

Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege by Bankruptcy Plan

Chapter 7

A Chapter 7 trustee acquires the business debtor’s attorney-client privilege; therefore, a business entity planning to file for bankruptcy must beware that its attorney-client privileged e-mails, letters, and other written and oral communications could fall into the hands of the bankruptcy trustee after the case is filed. The logic is outlined in the US Supreme Court opinion in Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n v. Weintraub 471 U.S. 343 (1985), which concerned a Chapter 7 case and a Chapter 7 trustee. The Weintraub court reasoned that a corporation is an inanimate legal construct that is capable of acting only through its human agents. Ordinarily, the power to exercise the corporate attorney-client privilege rests with the corporation’s officers and directors. When control of a corporation passes to new management, authority to assert the attorney-client privilege passes as well.

When a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case is filed, control and authority of the corporation, its business, and its assets pass to the Chapter 7 trustee, and the corporation’s officers and directors “retain virtually no management powers” per the court’s decision. The Weintraub court concluded that the Chapter 7 trustee, not the corporation’s officers and directors, should control the debtor’s attorney-client privilege. Although it was decided nearly 40 years ago, Weintraub remains the controlling law on the question of a corporate debtor’s ownership of attorney-client privilege in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. [i]

Chapter 11

In Chapter 11 bankruptcy plans where the debtor remains in possession of its business, and a trustee has not been appointed, the debtor-in-possession generally controls the attorney-client privilege. [ii]  If a Chapter 11 trustee is appointed, however, including the trustee of a liquidation trust created to liquidate assets of the debtor’s Chapter 11 estate, the trustee may acquire control of the attorney-client privilege. [iii]

In a 2014 Eastern District of Kentucky case, In re Black Diamond Min. Co., LLC, the court ordered Jones Day, the debtor’s Chapter 11 restructuring counsel, to turn over its entire file relating to its representation of the debtor to the liquidating trustee, including attorney work product and internal communications among Jones Day attorneys.

Caution in Pre-Bankruptcy Communication

Debtors’ attorneys must use caution when communicating with debtors about confidential and strategic matters, both before and after the case is filed. Counsel should also advise the debtor’s shareholders, directors, officers, and other key players to use discretion in communicating with counsel, and to be aware of the risk that attorney-client communication could be disclosed to a bankruptcy trustee.

---

We think you’ll also like:

1. Buying Operating Assets from a Distressed Seller
2. Kuney’s Corner – Cram Down: When the Creditor Says “No”
3. The Independent Director’s Role in Optimizing Corporate Workouts and Bankruptcy Outcomes

[Editors’ Note: To learn more about this and related topics, you may want to attend the following on-demand webinars (which you can view at your leisure, and each includes a comprehensive customer PowerPoint about the topic):

1. The Nuts & Bolts of Bankruptcy Law Series
2. Restructuring, Insolvency & Troubled Companies Series
3. Bankruptcy Intersections Series

This is an updated version of an article originally published on December 12, 2016 and updated May 28, 2020. This article was most recently updated by the DailyDAC Editors.]

©2024. DailyDAC^TM, LLC. This article is subject to the disclaimers found here.

[i]. See, e.g., In re Coyle, 538 B.R. 753, 764 n.2 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 2015).

[ii]. See In re Gulf States Long Term Acute Care of Covington, L.L.C., 09-11116, 2014 WL 1761622, at *3 (Bankr. E.D. La. May 1, 2014), citing American Metrocomm Corp. v. Duanne Morris & Hecksher L.L.P. (In re American Metrocomm Corp.), 274 B.R 641, 654 (Bankr. D. Del. 2002); see also Weintraub, 471 U.S. at 355-356.

[iii]. See, e.g., In re Black Diamond Min. Co., LLC, 507 B.R. 209, 214 (E.D. Ky. 2014) (focuses on trustee’s control of attorney work-product and ‘internal law firm document privilege,’ rather than attorney-client privilege). In a case filed by an individual person who disposed of large amounts of business property, the court held that the attorney-client privilege did not pass to the liquidating trustees. In re Hunt, 153 B.R. 445 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1992).