I have posted several times about the rash of attorney FLSA lawsuits where the claim is “I was only doing clerical work” theory. In one of these cases, involving Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, the plaintiff is seeking what the law firm has deemed a “fishing expedition” and needlessly expansive discovery demands. The case is entitled Henig v. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP and is filed in the Southern District of New York.

The law firm asserts that it provided all documents relating to whether the named plaintiff did/did not perform “attorney work.” In this regard, the plaintiff only worked there for six weeks, performing document review work in 2012. The firm claims that the documents prove Henig conducted himself as a lawyer.

Henig is seeking information relating to every applicant for the document review project, as well as the names of the interviewers of all applicants and all the papers concerning the firm’s decision to use the staffing agency named Providus to find contract attorneys. This demand is based on a Magistrate’s Order that the firm contends went well beyond the limitations imposed by a prior Order; in his recent decision, the Magistrate has determined that interrogatories and requests aimed at the “document review project overall” that Henig participated in, with other reviewers, is appropriate. Thus, the plaintiff claims the work histories of these other reviewers are fair game.

The plaintiff’s theory is that the “extremely routine nature” of his duties took him out of the professional exemption and essentially made him a clerk, a paper pusher (although he used a computer, instead of his hand, to push the paper. The firm has contended throughout that his work did fall within the safe harbor of the exemption, but Judge Ronnie Abrams would not dismiss the Complaint, finding factual issues concerning Henig’s actual work still remained.

I think the only documents relevant are those pertaining to whether Henig himself did or did not perform attorney work. It seems to be this might be a plaintiff tactic designed to facilitate or leverage a settlement.