Planned Parenthood seeks to hold anti-abortion activists’ attorneys in contempt

In a case steeped in confidentiality issues, Planned Parenthood called on a federal judge to hold attorneys representing an anti-abortion group in contempt and order monetary sanctions against them for sharing confidential material with a defense expert and a named defendant.

On Tuesday, a hearing was set for next month before U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick of San Francisco, who will determine whether attorneys representing the anti-abortion group, the Center for Medical Progress, violated a protective order by allegedly improperly sharing a transcript designated "Highly Confidential -- Attorneys' Eyes Only," with one of their experts set to testify.

The lead attorney for the center, Charles S. LiMandri of the Law Offices of Charles S. LiMandri APC, said he and his team brought what he called an inadvertent disclosure to Planned Parenthood's attention immediately after it was discovered.

Amy Lynne Bomse of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP

"We missed a beat on that but we told them immediately," LiMandri said in a telephone interview Tuesday. "It was an inadvertent disclosure that caused them no harm and that we immediately took steps to correct."

Represented by Amy Lynne Bomse of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Planned Parenthood seeks to enjoin the center from posting videos allegedly appearing to show staff members conspiring to sell fetal tissue.

According to Planned Parenthood, the videos were surreptitiously recorded without the staff's permission by two anti-abortion activists, David Robert Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, who supposedly disguised themselves to gain access to an abortion industry conference. Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc. v. Center for Medical Progress, 16-CV00236 (N.D. Cal., filed Jan. 14, 2016).

In the amended complaint, Planned Parenthood accused the center and its founders of invasion of privacy, racketeering and breach of contract. They seek statutory penalties as well as compensatory and punitive damages.

Following the release of the videos in 2015, three Planned Parenthood members were shot and killed outside a clinic by a man who said he was upset about clinics performing abortions and allegedly selling fetal tissue.

In 2016, Orrick entered a protective order allowing the parties to designate documents as "Attorney's' Eyes Only" where disclosure "is likely to cause a substantial risk of serious injury."

U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick of San Francisco

The videos, which Planned Parenthood claims are highly edited and misleading, have sparked outrage among anti-abortion groups, prompting federal and state investigations into numerous Planned Parenthood affiliates.

Texas, among other states, has attempted to defund Planned Parenthood following the release of the videos. After a district court issued a preliminary injunction preventing the state from terminating Medicaid funding to the Planned Parenthood facilities, a 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel, which appeared to determine the videos had merit, vacated the injunction and remanded the case to district court.

"The district court stated, inaccurately, that the CMP video had not been authenticated and suggested that it may have been edited," the panel wrote in its opinion in January.

In California, Attorney General Xavier Becerra filed 15 criminal charges of invasion of privacy against the two anti-abortion activists. However in a rare move, the state Supreme Court granted a last-minute stay, blocking a preliminary hearing to decide whether Becerra had enough evidence to proceed to trial. A similar criminal case against the duo was also dismissed in Texas.

Attorneys for Planned Parenthood were unavailable for comment Tuesday.