False Claims Act Case Limits Attorney-Client Privilege for In-House Counsel

by Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

[authors: Jeffrey B. Coopersmith, Kent B. Thurber, Robert G. Homchick]

Health care organizations should take careful note of  a recent decision from a Florida federal district court that sharply limited the defendant hospital’s ability to shield what it considered to be attorney-client privileged documents in a False Claims Act case. The ruling is particularly troubling in that it articulates a different standard for determining whether communications to and from in-house counsel, as opposed to outside counsel, are privileged, and applies the crime fraud exception to permit the discovery of privileged communications between in-house counsel and hospital finance executives.

These discovery rulings were made in a case filed against Halifax Hospital Medical Center by its director of physician services under the qui tam or whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act.  The complaint alleges that Halifax submitted false and fraudulent claims to Medicare and Medicaid because of underlying  violations of the federal anti-kickback statute and physician self-referral or Stark  law. The government intervened in the case and the qui tam plaintiff challenged the validity of the hospital’s assertions of the attorney-client privilege with respect to compliance and audit materials and communications about payment issues between the hospital’s finance and legal departments.

In resolving the disputes, U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas B. Smith took a very narrow view of the attorney-client privilege. As a starting point, Judge Smith distinguished communications between corporate clients and outside litigation counsel, which he said are “cloaked with a presumption of privilege,” and communications between corporate clients and in-house counsel, which he said “involve a much different dynamic,” because in-house counsel often participate in communications that either have a business purpose or do not have the provision of legal advice as their primary purpose. Judge Smith recognized other courts have found that communications emailed simultaneously to a lawyer and a non-lawyer within a company are not privileged because in that case the company “cannot claim that the primary purpose of the communication was for legal advice because the communication served both business and legal purposes.” Following this restrictive view, Judge Smith found that the availability of the privilege could even turn on whether the in-house lawyer appeared on the “to” line or the “cc” line of emails.

Among the related rulings, the court found the hospital’s compliance “referral log” was not subject to the privilege and was therefore discoverable. Halifax’s compliance department maintained a referral log recording all reports about compliance issues. The hospital took the position that the referral log was protected by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine because it was prepared for the purpose of obtaining legal advice and in anticipation of potential legal or administrative proceedings concerning the issues identified on the log. The hospital’s compliance director testified that the general counsel had instructed his department to keep the log in order to facilitate discussions with the legal department about litigation risk and potential legal exposure. All pages of the log were stamped “Confidential Attorney-Client Privilege Information.” The compliance department operated under the supervision and oversight of the legal department and the log’s maintenance was overseen by the general counsel. Nevertheless, after reviewing a representative sampling of the log’s entries, the court found that they were not protected because they simply recorded facts (the compliance complaints) and did not reflect communications with counsel for the purpose of obtaining legal advice.

The court also rejected privilege protection for a series of emails relating to audits and reviews conducted by the compliance and finance departments, on grounds including the lack of an attorney appearing in the “to” or “from” lines (as opposed to the “cc” lines) of emails, and findings that the primary purpose of the communications related to compliance rather than legal matters, or that emails were sent to a lawyer just to keep her in the loop rather than for the purpose of obtaining legal advice. Interestingly, regarding email “strings” generally, the court refused to characterize any string in its entirety and analyzed each email in a string individually. Only those individual emails that actually sought or transmitted legal advice were deemed to be privileged.

Among its more disturbing findings,  the court rejected privilege protection for two email messages between finance department employees and an in-house lawyer on the ground that the emails were within the “crime-fraud exception” to the attorney-client privilege. Although not ruling on the underlying merits of the case, the court found a prima facie case that the hospital “was engaged in or about to be engaged in fraudulent conduct when it sought [the lawyer’s] advice.” Judge Smith also found sufficient evidence that the lawyer’s assistance was sought and obtained in order for the finance employees to make allegedly fraudulent payments to certain doctors in violation of the Stark law.

Rulings on the attorney-client privilege are inherently fact-specific, and the reasoning of a federal magistrate judge in Orlando may not carry great precedential weight. Nevertheless, this decision is notable because it illustrates that one cannot assume that emails and other communications that touch on legal matters or that are sent to lawyers will automatically be covered by the attorney-client privilege. Great care must be taken to preserve the privilege, and, at a minimum, this case should serve as a wake-up call for anyone who has been lulled into a sense of complacency by less strict judicial interpretations. The Halifax case should serve as an impetus for companies to take a close look at their compliance department practices to maximize the chances that privileged communications will be protected. Given the particularly high stakes for victims of False Claims Act lawsuits, all communications with in-house counsel should be carefully and strategically managed, and the potential benefit of using outside counsel should be considered when appropriate.


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Davis Wright Tremaine LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.