The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P alleges he was wrongfully imprisoned for over eighteen (18) years based on a false conviction for murder and rape and that his conviction was based on the Ds' wrongful conduct. Based on the efforts of the Innocence Project the charges against P were dropped in May 2006, after DNA sample results indicated that the samples from the crime scene evidence did not match P's DNA profile. P sued Ds. P filed his motion after he discovered that he inadvertently produced allegedly privileged and irrelevant documents. P argues the documents are protected by the attorney client privilege and work product doctrine. P also claims two documents are protected by the cleric-penitent privilege. P alleges that he took reasonable steps to prevent the inadvertent disclosure. Ds argue that P cannot establish that he took reasonable steps to prevent the inadvertent disclosure and the number and extent of the disclosures support a finding of waiver. Ds argue that P delayed seeking to rectify his disclosure and that the interests of justice are not served by relieving P of his error and that P has not established that the documents in question are privileged.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.