i want to read from your piece here, because i thought it was striking as well. the lawyer for chapman university, whose computer hosted the the professor had no rights to use the email system, because it was partisan work on behalf of a political candidate, a violation of the university status as a non profit. any used by eastman of the emails was improper and unauthorized. it was like into contraband, as you just said. so you ve got the actual possessor s of the document saying, these are contraband. and now the claim that he is trying to make that these were protected by attorney client privilege, is that right? exactly. chapman s lawyer has argued that, we ll, chapman you i m sorry, eastman s lawyer argued that chapman knew that he represented outside clients. obviously, chapman is disputing
but the interesting development in the hearing the other day on this case was, the lawyer for chapman university, who said, in court, that all of these emails were improper, unauthorized, and he likened them to contraband because, this was a chapman university server, it wasn t easements personal server. so the idea that you could have attorney-client communications on a third party server is not likely to fly with judge carter. so he s emailing on his chapman address in the midst of this frenetic period and essentially coup plotting. they are sitting on the server. i want to read from your piece here, because i thought it was striking as well. the lawyer for chapman university, whose computer hosted the the professor had no rights to use the email system, because it was partisan work on behalf of a political candidate, a violation of the university