Barko v. Halliburton Company

District Court, District of Columbia·Decided November 20, 2014·No. Civil Action No. 2005-1276·Published

Opinion

United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., No. 1:05-cv-1276

APPENDIX A

Privilege Doc. Date Description Ruling Log No. 2 1 8/9/2001- E-mail chain with KBR counsel regarding guaranty Privileged and/or work product. 8/13/2001 agreement for LOGCAP proposal. 2 12 10/1/2007 Document from KBR Law Department regarding Not privileged or protected. document preservation directive and possible employee Litigation hold notice not intended interviews. to be confidential and not attorney work product. 2 13 4/29/2008 E-mail from Bill Utt and counsel to all KBR employees Not privileged or protected. regarding document preservation directive for all Litigation hold notice not intended activities under LOGCAP III and outside inquiries. to be confidential and not attorney work product. 2 14 5/25/2004 E-mail chain seeking and obtaining legal advice from Privileged and/or work product. corporate counsel relating to D&P B-6 Man Camp dispute. 2 15 5/25/2004 Duplicate of #14 above. Privileged and/or work product. 2 16 6/2/2004 Redacted e-mail chain requesting and discussing legal Not privileged or protected. Only advice from corporate counsel relating to D&P B-6 Man reflects that consultation with Camp dispute. [Redacted and produced as attorney occurred, not the KBR-BARKO-018116-018119] substance of the communication.

1 United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., No. 1:05-cv-1276

Privilege Doc. Date Description Ruling Log No. 2 17 5/3/2004 Redacted e-mail chain requesting legal advice from Not privileged or protected. For corporate counsel relating to D&P B-6 Man Camp some parts, attorney only an dispute. [Redacted and produced as incidental recipient. For other KBR-BARKO-018326-018331] parts, only reflects that consultation with attorney occurred, not the substance of the communication. 2 18 2/10/2006 E-mail chain with corporate counsel requesting and Privileged and/or work product. receiving legal advice about D&P B-6 Man Camp dispute and DCAA audit. 2 19 1/31/2006 E-mail to corporate counsel for purposes of receiving Privileged and/or work product. legal advice about D&P B-6 Man Camp dispute and DCAA audit. 2 20 1/4/2006 Memorandum produced at request of corporate counsel in Privileged and/or work product. order to obtain legal advice concerning EAMAR contract termination. 2 21 1/4/2006 Duplicate of #20 above. Privileged and/or work product. 2 22 1/4/2006 Duplicate of #20 above. Privileged and/or work product.

2 United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., No. 1:05-cv-1276

Privilege Doc. Date Description Ruling Log No. 2 23 1/7/2003 Redacted e-mail chain seeking and providing legal advice Redacted portion is privileged from corporate counsel concerning corporate registration and/or work product. in Jordan and the agentrelationship with D&P. [Redacted and produced as KBR-BARKO-35697-35700]

2 24 8/27/2004 Redacted e-mail conveying legal communications and Redacted portion is privileged requests for information from outside counsel at Vinson and/or work product. & Elkins. [Redacted and produced as KBR-BARKO- 035716-035717] 2 25 1/7/2003 Duplicate of #23 above. Redacted portion is privileged and/or work product. 2 26 5/4/2004 Redacted e-mail chain requesting and providing legal Not privileged or protected, except advice and conveying information to counsel for the for the email on page 3 of the purpose of obtaining legal advice about EAMAR contract document from Michael Hatch termination. [Redacted and produced as dated May 4, 2004. That email KBR-BARKO-035720-035721] may be redacted as it is a privileged communication from an attorney. The rest are communications where attorneys were mere incidental recipients.

3 United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., No. 1:05-cv-1276

Privilege Doc. Date Description Ruling Log No. 2 27 7/28/2004 E-mails among counsel and KBR investigator and Redacted portion is privileged security personnel acting at direction of counsel regarding and/or work product. allegations in the e-mail produced at KBR-BARKO-032706-10 to be considered as part of internal investigation CBC-KBR-2004-002148. 2 28 1/20/2003 E-mail chain seeking and discussing legal advice from Privileged and/or work product corporate counsel Chris Heinrich and Peter Arbour concerning corporate registration in Jordan and D&P sponsor-agent relationship. 2 29 1/14/2003 E-mail chain seeking and obtaining legal advice from Privileged and/or work product. corporate counsel Chris Heinrich concerning corporate registration in Jordan and D&P sponsor-agent relationship. 2 30 3/13/2005 E-mail chain seeking and obtaining legal advice from Privileged and/or work product. corporate counsel Chris Heinrich and Peter Arbour concerning corporate registration in Jordan and D&P sponsor-agent relationship. 2 31 1/17/2003 E-mail chain seeking and obtaining legal advice from Privileged and/or work product. corporate counsel Chris Heinrich concerning corporate registration in Jordan and D&P sponsor-agent relationship.

4 United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., No. 1:05-cv-1276

Privilege Doc. Date Description Ruling Log No. 2 32 1/14/2003 E-mail chain seeking and obtaining legal advice from Privileged and/or work product. corporate counsel Chris Heinrich concerning corporate registration in Jordan and D&P sponsor-agent relationship. 2 33 1/20/2003 E-mail chain seeking and obtaining legal advice from Privileged and/or work product. corporate counsel Chris Heinrich and Peter Arbour concerning corporate registration in Jordan and D&P sponsor-agent relationship. 2 34 1/13/2003 E-mail chain seeking legal advice from corporate counsel Privileged and/or work product. Chris Heinrich concerning corporate registration in Jordan and D&P sponsor-agent relationship. 2 35 1/16/2003 Form prepared at direction and with assistance of Privileged and/or work product. corporate counsel for review by corporate counsel Chris Heinrich of D&P sponsor-agent relationship in Jordan.

5 United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., No. 1:05-cv-1276

Privilege Doc. Date Description Ruling Log No. 2 36 1/13/2003 E-mail chain seeking and obtaining legal advice from Partially privileged. The two corporate counsel Chris Heinrich and Peter Arbour emails on page 1 of the concerning corporate registration in Jordan and D&P document—from Bill Courtney sponsor-agent relationship. dated January 13, 2003, and from Tod Nickles dated January 13, 2003—are not privileged or protected, as an attorney is only an incidental recipient, and in any event they do not seek or provide legal advice. The rest of the emails in the document are privileged communications that may be redacted. 3 1 7/5/2004 Redacted e-mail chain seeking legal advice from Redacted portion is privileged corporate counsel concerning EAMAR employees in Iraq. and/or work product. [Redacted and produced as KBRBARKO-E000351] 3 2 4/26/2004 E-mail chain seeking and obtaining legal advice from Privileged and/or work product. corporate counsel Chris Heinrich and Michael Hatch concerning corporate registration in Jordan and D&P sponsor-agent relationship.

6 United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., No. 1:05-cv-1276

Privilege Doc. Date Description Ruling Log No. 3 3 5/25/2004 E-mail chain seeking and receiving legal advice from Privileged and/or work product. corporate counsel concerning D&P B-6 Man Camp dispute. 3 4 6/6/2004 E-mail seeking legal advice from corporate counsel Privileged and/or work product. Michael Hatch concerning corporate registration in Jordan and D&P sponsor-agent relationship. 3 7 4/19/2004 Redacted e-mail chain seeking and obtaining legal advice Redacted portion is privileged from corporate counsel related to EAMAR contract and/or work product. termination.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Barko v. Halliburton Company, (D.D.C. 2014).

Barko v. Halliburton Company (Barko v. Halliburton Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.