Looks like another complaint against Utah’s allegedly most corrupt lawyer will be filed shortly with the Utah Bar. Under Utah law, any party in a lawsuit has the right to Discovery.
“Standard discovery and extraordinary discovery. Depending on the amount of damages claimed, a party is entitled to a certain amount of standard discovery, meaning the number of depositions, interrogatories, requests for admission, and requests for the production of documents. If a party needs more than the standard amount, the parties can stipulate to extraordinary discovery or file a motion asking the judge to order extraordinary discovery.”
But, Kelly Peterson is not just a defendant in a high profile lawsuit. He also seems woefully ignorant of the basic facts of law. In fact, Mr. Peterson is claiming billing records which would expose the fact that he was possibly trading legal representation for sex, are protected by attorney client privilege.
The law states that all financial records are public under Rule 26. Peterson cannot invoke privilege simply because the information will incriminate him. What is privileged are communications between an attorney and client, notes etc. Yet, even when claiming privilege:
b)(8) Claims of privilege or protection of trial preparation materials.
(b)(8)(A) Information withheld. If a party withholds discoverable information by claiming that it is privileged or prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial, the party shall make the claim expressly and shall describe the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced in a manner that, without revealing the information itself, will enable other parties to evaluate the claim.
(b)(8)(B) Information produced. If a party produces information that the party claims is privileged or prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial, the producing party may notify any receiving party of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a receiving party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has and may not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved. A receiving party may promptly present the information to the court under seal for a determination of the claim. If the receiving party disclosed the information before being notified, it must take reasonable steps to retrieve it. The producing party must preserve the information until the claim is resolved.
SO, what we have here is a clear case for disbarment based on Kelly Peterson’s attempts to obstruct justice as an officer of the Court. Where are Utah’s Law Enforcement Officers? A criminal investigation of Kelly Peterson and his alleged sexual abuse are long overdue.