From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coleman v. Bradshaw

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
Mar 10, 2014
Case No. 3:03-cv-299 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 10, 2014)

Opinion

Case No. 3:03-cv-299

03-10-2014

TIMOTHY L. COLEMAN, Petitioner, v. MARGARET BRADSHAW, Warden, Respondent.


District Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr.

Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz


ORDER TO PETITIONER'S COUNSEL

This capital habeas corpus case is before the Court on Petitioner's letter to Judge Sargus complaining of the conduct of his appointed counsel (Doc. No. 211). Coleman's counsel shall respond thereto not later than March 20, 2014. By reciting in the letter the content of various conversations between himself and his counsel, Coleman has waived the attorney-client communication privilege as to the content of those communications. The attorney-client privilege is waived by voluntary disclosure of the communication in such a way as to breach confidentiality United States v. Dakota, 197 F.3d 821, 825 (6 Cir. 2000), citing In re Grand Jury Proceedings October 12, 1995, 78 F.3d 251, 254 (6 Cir. 1996) Leybold-Heraeus Tech. Inc. v. Midwest Instrument Co., 118 F.R.D. 609 (E.D.Wis. 1977); supra; Fonar Corp. v. Johnson & Johnson, 277 U.S.P.Q. 886 (D. Mass. 1985).

Michael R. Merz

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Coleman v. Bradshaw

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
Mar 10, 2014
Case No. 3:03-cv-299 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 10, 2014)
Case details for

Coleman v. Bradshaw

Case Details

Full title:TIMOTHY L. COLEMAN, Petitioner, v. MARGARET BRADSHAW, Warden, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

Date published: Mar 10, 2014

Citations

Case No. 3:03-cv-299 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 10, 2014)