From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

O'Neal v. Am. Shaman Franchise Sys.

United States District Court, Middle District of Florida
Jul 2, 2024
8:20-cv-936-KKM-AAS (M.D. Fla. Jul. 2, 2024)

Opinion

8:20-cv-936-KKM-AAS

07-02-2024

THOMAS O'NEAL, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN SHAMAN FRANCHISE SYSTEM, LLC; CBD AMERICAN SHAMAN, LLC; SHAMAN BOTANICALS, LLC; SVS ENTERPRISES, LLC; STEPHEN VINCENT SANDERS II; BRANDON CARNES; and FRANCIS KALAIWAA, Defendants.


ORDER

AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE United States Magistrate Judge

Plaintiff Thomas O'Neal moves, for the third time, for the court to determine the applicability of the crime-fraud exception to emails withheld from production as attorney-client communications by Defendants American Shaman Franchise System, LLC (Shaman Franchise), CBD American Shaman, LLC (American Shaman), Shaman Botanicals, LLC, SVS Enterprises, LLC, Stephen Vincent Sanders II, and Francis Kalaiwaa (collectively, the Shaman Defendants). (Doc. 434). The Shaman Defendants respond in opposition. (Doc. 442). For the reasons set forth below, Mr. O'Neal's third motion to determine the applicability of the crime-fraud exception (Doc. 434) is DENIED.

Two prior orders denied Mr. O'Neal's previous requests for an order determining the applicability of the crime-fraud exception because Mr. O'Neal failed to establish a prima facie showing that the Shaman Defendants were engaged in crime or fraud. (See Docs. 286, 414). Mr. O'Neal does not bring forth any evidence to bolster his third request, and therefore he again fails to meet the requisite burden for applicability of the crime-fraud exception. Drummond Co., Inc. v. Conrad & Scherer, 885 F.3d 1324, 1335 (11th Cir. 2018) (citing In re Grand Jury Investigation, 842 F.2d 1223, 1226 (11th Cir. 1987) (“[T]here must be a prima facie showing that the client was engaged in criminal or fraudulent conduct when he sought the advice of counsel, that he was planning such conduct when he sought the advice of counsel, or that he committed a crime or fraud subsequent to receiving the benefit of counsel's advice. Second, there must be a showing that the attorney's assistance was obtained in furtherance of the criminal or fraudulent activity or was closely related to it.”)).

Accordingly, Mr. O'Neal's third motion to determine the applicability of the crime-fraud exception (Doc. 434) is DENIED.

ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on July 2, 2024.


Summaries of

O'Neal v. Am. Shaman Franchise Sys.

United States District Court, Middle District of Florida
Jul 2, 2024
8:20-cv-936-KKM-AAS (M.D. Fla. Jul. 2, 2024)
Case details for

O'Neal v. Am. Shaman Franchise Sys.

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS O'NEAL, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN SHAMAN FRANCHISE SYSTEM, LLC; CBD…

Court:United States District Court, Middle District of Florida

Date published: Jul 2, 2024

Citations

8:20-cv-936-KKM-AAS (M.D. Fla. Jul. 2, 2024)