Recent Development by Catherine L. Fornias
A violent explosion causing many injuries occurred in a digestion unit of a Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Company (Kaiser) plant on July 5, 1999. The plant, located in Gramercy, Louisiana, had been engaged in the business of processing bauxite into aluminum oxide, or alumina, which was then purchased by other businesses. In response to the explosion, the United States Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) began an investigation of Kaiser, called a public hearing, and issued subpoenas duces tecum directing Kaiser to produce certain documents.
Kaiser challenged the agency's actions, filing a motion in district court to quash the subpoenas. Kaiser contended that the MSHA lacked jurisdiction over the Gramercy plant, and that some of the documents sought were protected under either the work product doctrine or the self-evaluation privilege. The district court denied the motion and ordered compliance with the subpoenas, concluding that the MSHA had jurisdiction over the plant and that the disputed documents were not privileged. Kaiser appealed, reasserting both arguments. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the exercise of appellate jurisdiction over the case was authorized by statute, that the MSHA had jurisdiction over the Gramercy plant, and that the documents at issue were not shielded from discovery by either the work product doctrine or the self-evaluation privilege. In re Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Co., 214 F.3d 586 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 1354 (2001). This note will explore the third portion of the holding, wherein the court rejected Kaiser's invocation of both the work product doctrine and the self-evaluation privilege.
About the Author
Catherine L. Fornias.
Citation
76 Tul. L. Rev. 247 (2001)