In re FirstEnergy Corp.

No. 24-3654 · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · October 3, 2025 · No. 24-3654

Summary

The Sixth Circuit granted a petition for a writ of mandamus to vacate a district court's order compelling FirstEnergy Corporation to produce documents from internal investigations into a bribery scheme involving a former Ohio official. The court held that the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine shielded the materials because they were created in anticipation of litigation and sought legal advice regarding potential criminal and civil liability. Mandamus relief was deemed appropriate given the district court's clear legal error and the inadequacy of alternative review methods.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Chief Judge Sutton; Judge Batchelder; Judge Nalbandian
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decision date
October 3, 2025
Docket number
24-3654
Procedural posture
Petition for a writ of mandamus from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Columbus.
Standard of review
Mandamus standard – extraordinary remedy requiring a clear right and no other adequate means of relief.
Precedential value
published
Parties
FirstEnergy Corporation v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Columbus
Disposition
vacated

Topics

discovery disputecivil procedureappellate procedure

Practice areas

civil procedureappellate procedurecommercial litigationcorporate law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court’s privilege and work‑product rulings were erroneous.
  2. Whether those errors were sufficiently clear to warrant mandamus relief.

Holdings

  1. The district court erred; the attorney‑client privilege and work‑product doctrine apply to the internal investigations and protect the communications.
  2. The errors are clear and extraordinary; mandamus is appropriate and the district court’s production order is vacated.

Key quotations

The attorney‑client privilege “is the oldest of the privileges for confidential communications known to the common law.” Upjohn Co. v. United States, 449 U.S. 383, 389 (1981). (at 4)
Mandamus is a “drastic and extraordinary remedy reserved for really extraordinary causes.” Cheney, 542 U.S. at 380. (at 5)

Factual background

FirstEnergy, an Ohio public utility, faced financial strain and allegedly engaged in a bribery scheme with Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder to secure a $1.3 billion bailout. After a federal RICO complaint and subpoenas, FirstEnergy retained outside counsel (Squire and Jones Day) to conduct internal investigations. Shareholders sued and sought the fruits of those investigations, leading the district court to order production of the privileged materials.

Procedural history

The district court ordered production of privileged and work‑product documents. FirstEnergy filed a petition for mandamus in the Sixth Circuit. The appellate court granted the petition and vacated the district court’s production order.

Remand instructions

Vacate the district court’s document production order.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…