United States v. PPJV

2 OCAHO 368 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION REVIEW OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Complainant, v. PPJV, INC., DBA PUBLISHERS PRESS, Respondent. 8 U.S.C. 1324a Proceeding ) Case 90100306 ORDER DENYING MOTION IN LIMINE On August 14, 1991, Complainant filed a Motion in Limine to Exclude Hearsay Statements of Francisco Barba Pursuant to 28 CFR 68.9 and FRE 802 (motion). On August 16, 1991, Respondent filed an opposition thereto. The motion pertains to the receipt of evidence concerning Complaint Count 1 which alleges that Respondent unlawfully continued to employ Ricardo Navia from April 13 through May 21, 1990.

By its motion, Complainant seeks to exclude testimony by Respondent's president William Johnson about information provided in conversations with attorney Francisco Barba concerning Navia's employment eligibility. The motion reflects that Complainant sought to depose Barba in preparation for the hearing in this matter. Barba voluntarily appeared for the deposition but declined to testify after asserting that the information sought was subject to the attorney-client privilege arising from his representation of Navia. In view of Barba's refusal to 1 1 Neither Respondent nor Johnson have ever been represented by Barba.

For this reason, any claim that the attorney-client privilege attaches to potentially relevant conversations between Johnson and Barba appears misplaced. 543 2 OCAHO 368 voluntarily testify at deposition, the instant motion seeks to preclude any testimony by Johnson concerning his conversations with Barba. From the foregoing, I conclude that the present motion is fundamentally a premature hearsay objection which would be more appropriately lodged if, and when, Johnson seeks to testify concerning information which may have been provided by Barba. For this reason, the motion is denied.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 23, 1991 WILLIAM L. SCHMIDT Administrative Law Judge 544