Judges rule attorney-client privilege shields key sections but order disclosure of policy review materials.

Portions of a 2019 Seton Hall University report on former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick’s conduct will remain confidential after a state appeals court ruled they are protected by attorney-client privilege.

In a decision issued Monday, June 15, the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division ruled that the first two sections of a report prepared by the law firm Latham & Watkins are protected because the investigation was conducted to help Seton Hall’s lawyers provide legal advice and prepare for potential litigation. But the court also ruled that portions of the report dealing with university policies and procedures should be made public.

Don’t miss the NJ stories that matter. Sign up for our free newsletter  →

The ruling is part of litigation involving about 450 lawsuits filed under New Jersey’s Child Victims Act, the 2019 law that expanded the time period for survivors of childhood sexual abuse to file civil claims. The law reopened the window for survivors to pursue claims against institutions, leading to hundreds of lawsuits involving Catholic entities across the state, including Seton Hall University and the Archdiocese of Newark.

Seton Hall is named as a defendant in five cases involving McCarrick, the former archbishop of Newark who became one of the most prominent figures in the Catholic Church’s clergy sexual abuse crisis. McCarrick served as archbishop from 1986 to 2000 and held leadership positions at Seton Hall, including serving as president of the university’s Board of Trustees and chair of its Board of Regents. He also maintained a residence on campus.

Allegations of sexual misconduct against McCarrick surfaced publicly in 2017 and prompted investigations by the Vatican and other institutions associated with him. The following year, media reports detailed allegations involving seminarians and a minor, while Seton Hall received a complaint from a former seminarian alleging inappropriate touching. McCarrick was removed from public ministry in 2018 and was later laicized by the Vatican.

Concerned about potential liability and aware that the Child Victims Act was pending in the Legislature, Seton Hall retained the law firm Gibbons P.C., which then hired Latham & Watkins to conduct an independent investigation into McCarrick’s conduct and the university’s response.

McCarrick created “a culture of fear and intimidation” that supported his personal objectives and used his position as archbishop of Newark to sexually harass seminarians, according to the investigation, but “no minors or university students were determined to have been affected by McCarrick.”

The full report was subject to strict confidentiality measures. Members of Seton Hall’s Board of Regents were required to make appointments to review it, surrender their cellphones, sign confidentiality agreements, and read the report alone in a designated room. They were prohibited from making copies or discussing its contents outside executive sessions or as required by law.

The fight over the report began when attorneys for abuse survivors sought access to it as part of the clergy sex abuse lawsuits against the Archdiocese of Newark. In 2025, a Superior Court judge ruled that most of the report and related documents were not protected by attorney-client privilege. The judge ordered Seton Hall to turn over a redacted version of the Latham report, along with emails, attachments, and other records tied to the investigation, while allowing only limited protections for certain communications and legal conclusions. Seton Hall appealed that decision.

Because the investigation was conducted to help Seton Hall’s lawyers advise the university and prepare for possible lawsuits, the appeals court ruled that much of the material remained protected from disclosure.

According to the appellate judges, Seton Hall had a reasonable basis to anticipate litigation in 2018, citing public allegations against McCarrick, media coverage, and the pending Child Victims Act, which expanded the time for survivors of childhood sexual abuse to file civil claims.

The appeals court rejected arguments that Seton Hall waived attorney-client privilege by providing the report to the Vatican during its own investigation into McCarrick.

According to the opinion, Seton Hall believed church law required it to comply with the Vatican’s request, and both parties agreed the report would remain confidential. The court found that Seton Hall and the Vatican shared a common interest in investigating allegations of abuse and preventing future misconduct.

But the court drew a distinction between documents prepared for litigation and those evaluating university policies. The court ruled that the report’s third section, which examined Seton Hall’s sexual harassment policies and whether they complied with Title IX and best practices, constituted a critical analysis intended to improve university procedures rather than prepare for litigation.

Because of the public interest in addressing sexual harassment and abuse, that section of the report and related documents must be disclosed, the court held.

The appeals court also addressed the issue of thousands of emails and attachments tied to the investigation, some dating back to the 1980s. The judges agreed that documents do not automatically become confidential simply because they were attached to communications between lawyers and their clients. The trial court must review those records individually to determine which are protected by attorney-client privilege and which should be disclosed.

The case now heads back to the trial court for further review.