Barnett Banks Trust Co., N.A. v. Compson

Summary

The Florida Second District Court of Appeal held that a trust beneficiary litigating in an individual capacity against the trust could not obtain privileged attorney-client communications or work product concerning the litigation. The court also held that sharing information with aligned beneficiaries did not waive the privilege under the common-interest or joint-defense exception, and it quashed the discovery order.

Holdings

1. Florida's statutory duty requiring a trustee to keep beneficiaries reasonably informed does not require disclosure of privileged materials concerning a pending lawsuit in which a beneficiary litigates individually to retain, rather than return, trust assets.
2. The attorney-client privilege belongs to the trustee as the client with respect to litigation-related communications among the trustee and its attorneys when the litigation is undertaken to recover assets for the trust.
3. Sharing litigation information among the trustee, aligned beneficiaries, and their attorneys did not waive the attorney-client privilege or work product protection because the participants shared a common interest in recovering the trust assets.
4. The proposed litigation budget was protected from compelled disclosure because it contained the litigation strategy and opinions of counsel concerning the pending suit.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a trust beneficiary who litigates in an individual capacity to retain assets transferred from the trust may obtain the trustee's litigation-related communications under the trustee's statutory duty to provide information to beneficiaries.
2. Whether the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine protect communications among the trustee, its attorneys, and aligned beneficiaries when those parties share a common interest in recovering trust assets.
3. Whether the proposed litigation budget, containing litigation strategy and attorney opinions, is protected work product.

Disposition

writ_granted