According to Reason's report, Judge Colleen McMahon of the Southern District of New York issued a sharply worded order in Freeman v. Deebs-Elkenaney, telling plaintiff's counsel that her prior order was clear and that the plaintiff must answer every question put to her, whether or not it had been asked before. The judge said that if a new attorney-client privilege objection arises, counsel must call her chambers immediately for a ruling.
McMahon warned that more than one frivolous privilege objection could result in sanctions, adverse inferences, referral to the court's Grievance Committee, possible revocation of pro hac vice admission or admission to the bar, and civil contempt. She said she did not believe the plaintiff's lawyer was acting in good faith and that she was being "jerked around." She also set a hard deadline: after 5 PM EDT Wednesday, privilege disputes would require counsel to return Thursday at noon for a telephonic hearing, with no deferred procedures.
The judge added that her schedule now controls and that she did not care if that conflicted with counsel's plans. Reason notes that Freeman's lawyer filed a related brief defending his position, but the order itself leaves little room for further argument. The source does not include any response from the judge to that filing.