<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Denny Hecker alleges that a former employee stole privileged documents</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tjconleylaw.com/2009/11/denny-hecker-alleges-that-a-former-employee-stole-privileged-documents/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tjconleylaw.com/2009/11/denny-hecker-alleges-that-a-former-employee-stole-privileged-documents/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 12:59:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Cooperstein</title>
		<link>http://www.tjconleylaw.com/2009/11/denny-hecker-alleges-that-a-former-employee-stole-privileged-documents/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Cooperstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:51:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tjconleylaw.com/?p=656#comment-10</guid>
		<description>Just on the facts you’ve summarized, T.J., I think Hecker’s attorneys are grasping at straws. It looks like they failed to properly protect privileged documents and failed to respond promptly when they were notified by opposing counsel about the docs. Those are 2 big factors leading to a waiver of privilege. The secretary’s alleged violation of other laws won’t likely help him either - there’s no civil “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine. 

But this will be a great example to talk about at the ethics seminar we’re doing on Dec. 4th!

ETC</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just on the facts you’ve summarized, T.J., I think Hecker’s attorneys are grasping at straws. It looks like they failed to properly protect privileged documents and failed to respond promptly when they were notified by opposing counsel about the docs. Those are 2 big factors leading to a waiver of privilege. The secretary’s alleged violation of other laws won’t likely help him either &#8211; there’s no civil “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine. </p>
<p>But this will be a great example to talk about at the ethics seminar we’re doing on Dec. 4th!</p>
<p>ETC</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

