Connection lost
Server error
United States v. Deloitte LLP Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A company disclosed attorney work product to its independent auditor. The court held this did not waive protection because the auditor was not an adversary and had a duty of confidentiality. However, a document created by the auditor itself required court review to confirm its protected status.
Legal Significance: Establishes that disclosing work product to a company’s independent auditor does not waive protection if there is a reasonable expectation of confidentiality. It also affirms that documents created by third parties can contain protected work product if they record an attorney’s mental impressions concerning litigation.
United States v. Deloitte LLP Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
In an underlying tax dispute between Dow Chemical Company and the United States, the government subpoenaed documents from Dow’s independent auditor, Deloitte. Dow asserted work-product protection over three documents. The first was a memorandum prepared by Deloitte that summarized a meeting between Dow employees, Dow’s outside counsel, and Deloitte employees regarding potential litigation with the IRS (the “Deloitte Memorandum”). The other two were a 1998 memorandum from Dow’s in-house counsel and a 2005 tax opinion from its outside counsel (the “Dow Documents”). Dow had disclosed the Dow Documents to Deloitte, stating it was compelled to do so to secure an unqualified audit opinion for its public financial statements. The government moved to compel production, arguing the Deloitte Memorandum was not work product because it was created by a non-representative for audit purposes, not in anticipation of litigation. The government conceded the Dow Documents were work product but argued Dow waived protection by disclosing them to Deloitte, a third party. The district court denied the government’s motion, finding all three documents were protected and that no waiver had occurred.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a party waive work-product protection by disclosing protected materials to its independent auditor, and can a document created by that auditor qualify as the party’s protected work product?
The court affirmed that Dow did not waive work-product protection for the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore mag
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does a party waive work-product protection by disclosing protected materials to its independent auditor, and can a document created by that auditor qualify as the party’s protected work product?
Conclusion
This case clarifies the boundaries of the work-product doctrine in the corporate Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. D
Legal Rule
A document is prepared "in anticipation of litigation" if, under the "because Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit a
Legal Analysis
The court first analyzed whether the Deloitte Memorandum was protected work product. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dol
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Work-product protection can cover an attorney’s mental impressions even if recorded
