The district court’s decision marked "a novel, substantial, and unwarranted expansion in the crime-fraud exception" to attorney-client privilege, the traders’ lawyer, Jeffrey Wall of Sullivan & Cromwell, wrote in court papers. The Justice Department counters that the attorney-client privilege wasn’t meant to shield clients who lie to counsel to conceal alleged criminal activity. The government opposes the traders’ request to hold a secret oral argument, set for next month in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Follow this link:
Bank Traders’ Lawyers Want Sealed Argument in Grand Jury Subpoena Dispute
