People

Jeffrey Schomig

Attorney

Schomig, Jeffrey

Jeffrey Schomig's practice includes representing clients in government regulatory and criminal investigations and in civil litigation. His practice also focuses on advising clients and other attorneys concerning attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine issues in a range of contexts, including the formation of joint defense relationships and non-waiver agreements. His decade-and-a-half of focus on legal privileges has allowed him to gain unique perspective on this area of law. Mr. Schomig’s work includes: 

  • advising on the use of common legal interest arrangements to protect sensitive legal communications between transacting parties during complex deal negotiations;
  • counseling on privilege protection issues for internal, regulatory compliance controls and policies;
  • advising multinational clients on a range of issues involving the intersection of US and foreign privilege law, such as the impact of disclosure to foreign law enforcement authorities, compulsion and conflicts of privilege law;
  • preparing a common legal interest arrangement for a multinational consortium of high tech companies to allow the members to collectively address regulatory concerns in a privilege-protected setting;
  • preparing a communications protocol for trade association members to exchange privileged information;
  • advising companies on privilege protection for internal investigation materials in response to data breach incidents; and
  • counseling financial institutions on privilege waiver and work product claims issues associated with regulatory cooperation. 

Engaging in cutting-edge developments impacting legal privilege is key to both influencing the direction of those developments, and remaining a thought leader who can counsel clients and colleagues on how developing issues will impact them. To that end, Mr. Schomig serves on the Privilege Standing Committee, the primary advisory body to the firm's lawyers on attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine issues.

Mr. Schomig is a frequent instructor at CLE courses and an author on privilege topics. His articles have been published by Bloomberg Law Reports, Bloomberg BNA, Antitrust Report, Corporate Counsel and the Association of Corporate Counsel’s The Docket.

Prior to joining WilmerHale, Mr. Schomig practiced insurance, aviation and commercial civil litigation in Maryland, where he represented corporate and individual clients at deposition, during negotiation, at motion hearings and at trial.

Publications & News

View

June 13, 2017

One Year After Ambac: Sharing Information Among Deal Parties

In this Law360 article, Daniel Halston, Alexandra Boudreau and Jeffrey Schomig explain that the common interest doctrine remains a thorny issue one year after the major Ambac Assurance Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc. decision.

April 28, 2017

2017 M&A Report

Our 2017 M&A Report provides a detailed global M&A market review and outlook. Other highlights include takeover defenses for public companies; key lessons for buyers and sellers considering earnouts; recent developments in merger control regulation; common interest privilege protection among deal parties; special considerations in California M&A deals; acquisition financial statement requirements for IPO companies; a comparison of deal terms in public and private acquisitions; and key terms and issues in sales of VC-backed companies.

November 23, 2015

2nd Circ. Provides Some Clarity On Legal Advice Protections

An article by Jonathan Cedarbaum, Charles Platt, Alan Schoenfeld and Jeffrey Schomig, published in the November 23, 2015 issue of Law360. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently ruled that the “common interest” doctrine protects legal and tax liability analysis prepared for a client and subsequently shared with a consortium of banks providing financing for the client. Schaeffler v. United States, No. 14-1965, slip op. (2d Cir. Nov. 10, 2015).

November 13, 2015

Second Circuit Clarifies Common Legal Interest and Work Product Doctrines for Material Shared Among Transacting Parties

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently ruled that the “common interest” doctrine protects legal and tax liability analysis prepared for a client and subsequently shared with a consortium of banks providing financing for the client.

September 15, 2015

Privilege protection for internal investigations: lessons from KBR I & II

An article co-authored by Carl Nichols and Jeffrey Schomig, published in Global Investigations Review on September 15, 2015.

June 29, 2015

Mastering Privilege Protection During E-Discovery

An article co-authored by Jeffrey Schomig, published in Corporate Counsel on June 29, 2015.

February 25, 2015

In Search of an Effective Defense to Litigation Fishing Expeditions Into Private, Associational Political Speech

An article co-authored by Jeffrey P. Schomig, along with Reagan E. Bradford of Chesapeake Energy Corp., published in Bloomberg BNA's The United States Law Week on February 24, 2015.

January 1, 2011

The Ability of Trade Associations to Receive Advice on Antitrust and Other Legal Risks: Are These Communications Protected from Discovery?

An article by Jeffrey Schomig, appearing in Bloomberg Law Reports—Antitrust & Trade, Volume 4, Number 6.

June 1, 2010

Trust Us: Taint Teams and the Government's Peek at Your Company's Privileged Documents

An article by Eric Mahr and Jeffrey Schomig, appearing in ACC Docket: The Journal of the Association of Corporate Counsel, Volume 28, Number 5, Page 74.

October 9, 2007

EU Court Clarifies Limits on Legal Privilege in European Commission Investigations

Professional Activities

Mr. Schomig has instructed at CLE courses on the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine, and serves on the editorial board of the ABA's Pretrial Practice & Discovery Committee website. He has published articles on Maryland's retail gasoline below-cost pricing statute: "Laws Protection Will Hurt Consumers," The Capital, September 2, 2001, at A11; and on privilege issues: "To Produce or Not Produce? Common Pitfalls and Important Considerations When Withholding Responsive Documents from Second Request Production," Antitrust Report, May 2001, at 20.

Mr. Schomig is a member of the American Bar Association's Litigation Section (Pretrial Practice and Discovery Committee) and Antitrust Section (Antitrust Litigation, Civil Practice & Procedure, State Antitrust Enforcement, Sherman Act Section 1 and Clayton Act Committees), and is a contributor to Antitrust Law Developments (5th ed. 2002).

Practices

Skip Navigation Links.

Education

JD, University of Richmond, 1996, Lead Articles Editor, Richmond Journal of Law and The Public Interest

BA, American University, 1992

Bar Admissions

District of Columbia

Maryland

Skip Navigation Links.