Securities and Exchange Commission v. Prakash

Summary

The court addresses a discovery dispute in which Defendant Vidul Prakash sought interview notes prepared by the Securities and Exchange Commission during its pre-suit investigation. The court held that the notes were protected work product but found that Defendant demonstrated substantial need for potentially relevant fact work product concerning a key issue in the case. The court ordered the SEC to submit three sets of notes for in camera review and denied the request for similar interview memoranda.

Holdings

1. The Commission's notes from the February 2022 pre-suit interview were protected work product because they were prepared in anticipation of litigation.
2. Defendant demonstrated substantial need for the factual portions of the interview notes and could not, without undue hardship, obtain their substantial equivalent by other means.
3. Defendant was not entitled at that stage to production of similar interview memoranda prepared during the Commission's pre-suit investigation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether notes prepared by the Commission during its pre-suit investigation were protected work product.
2. Whether Defendant established substantial need for the factual contents of the interview notes and could not obtain their substantial equivalent without undue hardship.
3. Whether Defendant was entitled to production of similar interview memoranda from the Commission's pre-suit investigation.

Disposition

other