In Re: Steeg
This text of In Re: Steeg (In Re: Steeg) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.
Nos. 97-30214, 97-30244.
SEALED APPELLEES, Third Party Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
SEALED APPELLANTS, Third Party Defendants-Appellants.
In re Moise S. STEEG, Jr. and Steeg & O'Connor, Petitioners.
April 18, 1997.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
On Pet ition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
We are not persuaded that the discovery order entered by the district court and contested
here is an appealable order. Nor can we conclude that this order compelling production of the
documents meets the demanding standard for issuing a writ of mandamus. The preferable practice
in factual patterns, such as here, is for the court to examine a sufficient number of the contested
documents to insure the informed protection of the privilege protecting the thought processes of an
attorney. That examination can be conducted by the court or a special master or magistrate judge
as the district court may choose.
We dismiss the appeal and deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We also stay the order
of production pending further order of the district court. Our stay left, as it is, in the control of the
district court is to allow the in camera examination of documents the district court may order.
The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction, and the petition for writ of mandamus is
denied. The production order at issue is stayed pending further order of the district court.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re: Steeg, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-steeg-ca5-1997.