United States: Implied Waiver Of Privilege In Internal Investigations: Barko Court Compels Production Of Internal Investigation Documents, Again

On November 20, 2014, the District Court for the District of Columbia once again ordered Kellogg, Brown and Root ("KBR") to produce all documents prepared as part of an internal investigation.  The District Court's decision comes after the D.C. Circuit, in an opinion that was welcome news for in-house counsel, found that the documents prepared during an internal investigation were protected by the attorney-client privilege since one of the "significant purposes" of the communications was to obtain or provide legal advice.  On remand, the District Court nonetheless ordered KBR to produce the documents because it found that, under the doctrine of implied waiver, KBR waived the privilege by placing in dispute what otherwise would have been privileged matters when it represented to the Court that the internal investigation resulted in no evidence of fraud.1


In June 2005, plaintiff-relator Henry Barko, a former contract administrator for KBR in Iraq, filed a qui tam False Claims Act ("FCA") lawsuit against Halliburton and its former subsidiary, KBR.  Barko alleged that KBR fraudulently inflated the costs of construction services on military bases in Iraq and passed on those costs to the U.S. Government.  From 2004 to 2006, before Barko's complaint was unsealed, Halliburton, pursuant to its Code of Business Conduct ("COBC"), investigated these allegations.  During discovery, Barko requested production of documents related to this internal investigation.  KBR confirmed that documents responsive to Barko's request existed but withheld them on attorney-client privilege and work-product protection grounds.

March 2014:  The District Court Finds the Attorney-Client Privilege Did Not Apply to KBR's Internal Investigation Documents and Compels Production

The District Court's earlier decision had ordered KBR to produce internal investigation documents because it found that the documents were created for a business purpose, i.e., compliance with regulatory disclosure requirements, and not to obtain legal advice.2 The District Court's order was widely criticized because internal investigations are often conducted with dual purposes:  to comply with business or regulatory requirements and to seek legal advice.  Moreover, internal investigations, even if conducted in great measure to meet business or regulatory requirements, may also be intended to reveal risks of future litigation.

As we noted in a previous blog post, it is likely that the District Court's in camera review provided an impetus for its decision to order production of the documents.  The Court termed KBR's investigation reports "eye-openers" because, in its view, the reports contained both direct and circumstantial evidence of fraud.

June 2014: The D.C. Circuit Vacates the District Court's Order and Finds That Internal Investigation Documents Are Protected by the Attorney-Client Privilege Where at Least One Significant Purpose of the Communications Is to Seek Legal Advice

On June 27, 2014, the D.C. Circuit vacated the District Court's order requiring the production of the internal investigation documents.3  The Court held the proper test for determining attorney-client privilege is "whether obtaining or providing legal advice was one of the significant purposes of the attorney-client communication."  Using this test, the privilege would apply to an internal investigation regardless of whether it was conducted pursuant to company policy or legal requirements, as long as one significant purpose was to obtain legal advice.

November 2014: The District Court Finds KBR Waived the Attorney-Client Privilege and Compels It to Produce Internal Investigation Documents

In its November 2014 order, the District Court held that KBR could not now "hide" behind the attorney-client privilege (which the D.C. Circuit had held existed) where the company had placed the contents of the investigation's report at issue.  The Court concluded that KBR impliedly waived the attorney-client privilege because its motion for summary judgment "intentionally put the contents of the COBC investigation at issue when it represented that its internal investigation of Barko's allegations yielded no reasonable grounds to believe fraud may have occurred."4

The Court determined that KBR put the contents of the COBC investigation files at issue at Rule 30(b)(6) depositions.  The deponent testified that he reviewed the investigation files in preparation for the deposition.  KBR's attorney blocked Barko's attempts to question the deponent regarding what reports and evidence supported KBR's decision not to provide notice of potential kickbacks or fraud to the Department of Defense.  Then, KBR's attorney examined his own 30(b)(6) witness and solicited statements to the effect that if a KBR investigation yielded evidence of fraud or kickbacks, KBR always reported that to the government.  Since KBR had provided no such notice, the clear implication was that no wrongdoing was found in the investigation.

KBR later used the witness' statements in its statement of material undisputed facts its motion for summary judgment.  According to the Court, KBR thereby "injected the COBC contents into the litigation by itself soliciting [its witness'] Rule 30(b)(6) testimony."5 Thus, the Court concluded that "fairness dictates that all the documents in question be produced so that [plaintiff is] able to examine the documents to challenge whether the withheld documents actually support the inferences that [defendants'] attorneys suggested to this Court."6

Using the same fairness considerations, the Court also found that KBR waived the attorney-client privilege when its witness examined COBC documents to refresh his recollection before testifying as KBR's Rule 30(b)(6) witness.  The Court emphasized that the COBC documents "have almost no attorney opinion materials; instead investigator-taken statements and investigator reports predominate."7  In addition, the Court found that KBR's testimony and repeated suggestion that the COBC documents did not contain any evidence of fraud weighed in favor of disclosure.8 Using this fairness analysis, the Court held that disclosure was required under Federal Rule of Evidence 612, which allows an opposing party to inspect writings a witness used to refresh his memory.  The Court noted, however, that "[i]n most cases, Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses who have examined privileged materials before testifying will not waive the privilege."9

Immediately after the Court's Opinion and Order, KBR filed a Motion for Reconsideration.  On December 17, 2014, the District Court denied KBR's motion for reconsideration, denied KBR's motion for certification of an interlocutory appeal, and denied a stay of the Court's November 20, 2014 order pending the disposition of KBR's mandamus position.  The Court did, however, grant a seven day stay of the order so that KBR could file an emergency motion under Circuit Rule 27(f).10  On December 19, 2014, KBR filed for an emergency stay as well as a mandamus petition to vacate the court's November 20, 2014 and December 17, 2014 orders.  The Court of Appeals granted the administrative stay of the orders; briefing on the issue is scheduled to be completed February 23, 2015.  Meanwhile, the District Court denied KBR's motion to stay all proceedings, allowing Barko to continue with depositions.11

Conclusion and Lessons

The District Court's order signals that companies need to carefully consider revealing internal investigation findings in litigation.  However discretely or summarily presented, such statements could have the unintended effect of waiving privilege.  Relying on such waiver, the DistrictCourt in Barko managed to reach its original result – compelling KBR to produce internal investigation documents – despite the Circuit Court's broad application of the attorney-client privilege.  A court's "fairness" analysis is very flexible and fact-dependent, and may skew in favor of finding a waiver of privilege, and thus disclosure (as in Barko), of the entire investigative file.  Barko, if it stands, teaches that companies must completely avoid making arguments to a court, or elsewhere to third parties (e.g. in presentations to the government), that rely on the conclusions of internal investigations if they determine those investigations must remain privileged.


1.United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., 1:05-CV-1276, Opinion & Order (D.D.C. Nov. 20, 2014) ("Nov. 20, 2014 Order").

2.United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., 1:05-CV-1276, 2014 WL 1016784 (D.D.C. Mar. 6, 2014) vacated sub nom. In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 756 F.3d 754 (D.C. Cir. 2014).

3.In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 756 F.3d 754 (D.C. Cir. 2014).

4.Nov. 20, 2014 Order at 10.

5.Id. at 21.

6.Id. at 23.

7.Id. at 25.

8.Id. at 25-26.

9.Id. at 26.

10.United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., 1:05-CV-1276, Opinion & Order (D.D.C. Dec. 17, 2014).

11.United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., 1:05-CV-1276, Opinion & Order (D.D.C. Jan. 10, 2015).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
29 Nov 2017, Webinar, Los Angeles, United States

This webinar will cover issues that California employers must face when managing a remote workforce of employees who “telecommute” for work. Due to the growing number of employees that work from home, California employers must know how to manage this new remote workforce in order to offer competitive career opportunities for a new generation of employees, while also being careful not to violate the complex California employment laws that govern these work arrangements.

30 Nov 2017, Conference, Brussels, Belgium

The European Competition and Regulatory Law Review (CoRe), the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) are delighted to invite you to our joint conference discussing some of today’s most frequently asked questions: Does competition law enforcement require an update for online markets?

4 Dec 2017, Conference, Virginia, United States

The Government Contract Management Symposium (GCMS) is held annually by the National Contract Management Association (NCMA) in the Washington, DC metro area. Formerly intended for those in federal sector, it has grown to provide training for professionals in both government and industry contracting.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

*** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.