Legal Clash in Michael Jackson Case Over Confidentiality

The long-running civil case brought against Michael Jackson’s companies by Wade Robson and James Safechuck continues to evolve, with key legal disputes now centering around the classification of discovery materials and the nature of the case itself. The plaintiffs are at odds with the defense over what should be deemed confidential, with arguments touching on issues of media exposure, legal transparency, and the sensitive nature of the allegations, the court heard yesterday.

Confidentiality Under Fire

One of the central points of contention in the latest hearings revolves around the proposed designation of materials as “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” (AEO). Defense attorney Jennifer Keller has pressed for this designation, citing the extraordinary public interest in the case and the need to protect sensitive information. Keller emphasized that Michael Jackson’s celebrity status, combined with the involvement of individuals such as Dan Reed and the Leaving Neverland 2 (LN2) documentary, heightens the risk of public dissemination of sensitive discovery material.

Specifically, Keller argued that because attorney Jonathan Carpenter was involved in LN2, safeguards must be put in place to ensure that any material obtained during discovery is not leaked or shared beyond the legal teams directly involved. The judge agreed in principle with the necessity for such protection, acknowledging the unique complexities of a case involving a global figure like Michael Jackson. However, no formal ruling was issued during the latest hearing.

By contrast, attorneys for Robson and Safechuck contend that the defense’s proposed designations are excessive and would only serve to stifle transparency and complicate proceedings. They maintain that the original protective order established by the court in 2014 remains sufficient, regardless of the plaintiffs’ public presence in media like LN2. According to the plaintiffs, adding restrictive layers to confidentiality will only lead to further legal disputes and hinder the progression of the case.

Complex Case Classification and Discovery Timeline

Another pivotal issue debated in court is the classification of the litigation as a “complex case.” While the Complex Litigation Court had previously denied the designation, Keller renewed her push to have the case treated accordingly, citing the intricate factual background, high media visibility, and extensive discovery required. The judge agreed with Keller’s reasoning and signaled support for treating the matter as complex litigation going forward, though no formal stipulation between the parties has been reached to date.

An excerpt from the August 2024 hearing submitted by the defense, showed the judge previously suggesting both parties could stipulate to the complex classification. Despite mutual acknowledgment of the case’s scope, neither side has officially agreed to the designation.

Discovery Challenges and Timeline

As discovery formally ramps up after years of preliminary motions and procedural delays, both parties have come to a joint proposal for the timeline. According to this schedule:

• Written discovery requests may proceed through October 2025

• Factual discovery will continue through February 2026

• Depositions may be conducted until June 2026

• Final discovery submissions are due by July 31, 2026

During the latest court hearing, the judge also addressed delays in discovery production. Carpenter requested an additional 60 days to complete his portion of discovery, but Keller argued the extension was excessive. The judge ultimately granted Carpenter 45 additional days, a compromise aimed at keeping the case moving while acknowledging the workload involved.

Both sides agreed that it is too early in the process to raise stipulations or arguments based on specific facts or evidence. With discovery “now underway in earnest,” the defense has asked the court to set a deadline for amending any pleadings, a move aimed at creating structure and avoiding further procedural surprises.

What’s Next

The next hearing in the case is scheduled for July 11, 2025. As discovery continues, the court will likely revisit the issues of confidentiality, complex case treatment, and the evolving boundaries of what can be shared and with whom.