Quarles & Brady, LLP v. Birdsall
27 Fla. L. Weekly D137 (Fla. 2d DCA Jan. 9, 2002)
Nancy Jarvi, a secretary of the law firm, was deposed by the Birdsalls. She stated that she had no knowledge of the legal malpractice case against Demarest and the firm until her deposition was requested. Since that time, she had not discussed the lawsuit with any from the firm except Mr. Doyle who was the supervising partner and initially represented the law firm in the case. She testified that she discussed the case with him in preparation for the deposition. In response to the follow up question , "What was discussed in that conversation?", the attorney client privilege was invoked and Jarvi did not answer that question. The Birdsalls filed a motion to compel Jarvi to answer the question in regards to what was discussed. The trial court granted the motion.
The court found that undue hardship was not an exception, nor was disclosure permitted because the opposing party claimed that the privileged information was necessary to prove their case. Thus, the appellate court granted the petition for a writ of certiorari and quashed the order on review.