General Motors, LLC, and General Motors Company v. Alphons Iacobelli, FCA US, LLC, Stellantis, NV, and Jerome Durden; Susanne Iacobelli

Summary

The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed discovery and summary-disposition rulings in consolidated appeals arising from General Motors’ civil claims concerning an alleged FCA-UAW bribery and labor-relations conspiracy. The court addressed NLRA preemption, assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, selective waiver, and spousal privilege in deposition and subpoena proceedings. The opinion concluded that Alphons Iacobelli generally could not refuse discovery on the asserted privileges, although a limited risk of perjury prosecution was recognized for certain foreign-bank-account questions before the trial court’s final ruling.

Holdings

1. GM's state-law claims were not preempted under Garmon, and the Wayne Circuit Court had subject-matter jurisdiction. The claims focused on alleged fraud and intentional torts causing harm to GM as a business, not on violations of employees' rights under NLRA §§ 7 or 8. The local-interest exception would also apply because the claims involved traditional state-law tort interests and presented little realistic threat of interference with the NLRB's regulatory jurisdiction.
2. A witness may invoke the Fifth Amendment in a civil deposition only when the answer could create a real and reasonable danger of future incrimination; remote or speculative possibilities are insufficient. The trial court properly compelled Iacobelli to answer questions for which that danger was absent.
3. A witness who voluntarily testifies about a subject may not invoke the Fifth Amendment to withhold further answers concerning the details of that same subject. Iacobelli selectively waived the privilege regarding subjects such as the Ferrari purchase, communications with Marchionne, and inaccuracies in DeLorenzo's affidavit.
4. Michigan's spousal privilege did not permit Iacobelli to refuse the 20 deposition questions concerning Susanne. The privilege applies to testimony by one spouse for or against the other spouse in the same civil action or administrative proceeding; Susanne was not a party, and the testimony was not against her legal interests.
5. Susanne's handwritten notes were not protected by Michigan's spousal privilege because producing documents is not an examination of a spouse as a sworn witness. The Fifth Amendment act-of-production doctrine also did not protect the notes because Susanne identified their existence and possession in a privilege log and established no real risk of prosecution.

Questions Presented

1. Whether GM's state-law fraud, fiduciary-duty, unfair-competition, and civil-conspiracy claims were preempted by the NLRA under San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon, thereby depriving the Wayne Circuit Court of subject-matter jurisdiction.
2. Whether Iacobelli properly invoked the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination during his deposition, including whether selective waiver barred particular invocations and whether a real, reasonable danger of prosecution remained.
3. Whether Iacobelli could invoke Michigan's spousal privilege to refuse deposition questions concerning Susanne when Susanne was not a party to the action and the testimony would not be against her legal interests.
4. Whether Susanne's handwritten notes concerning conversations with Iacobelli were protected by Michigan's spousal privilege or by the Fifth Amendment act-of-production doctrine.

Disposition

affirmed