Court: Communications between woman, lawyer in lawsuit against ex-Viking Dalvin Cook to stay private

Communications between a woman and her lawyer in her lawsuit alleging physical and emotional abuse by ex-Minnesota Viking Dalvin Cook may not be disclosed to Cook's attorneys, who have since countersued, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled Monday.

It's the latest development in the ongoing legal battle between Gracelyn Trimble and Cook, who was released earlier this year after six-seasons with the Vikings. After Trimble filed her lawsuit against Cook in November 2021, Cook responded by filing a defamation suit against Trimble, his former girlfriend, who was at the time a sergeant first class in the U.S. Army serving in Italy.

Trimble accuses Cook of physically abusing her and holding her against her will in November 2020 at his Inver Grove Heights home. Cook has denied the accusations and alleges she committed fraud and defamed him. The two cases are pending.

The appeals court decision Monday stems from Cook's claim in Hennepin County District Court against one of Trimble's attorneys, Daniel Cragg. Cook alleges that Cragg defamed him in the media and lawsuit. He further argued that, by Cragg sharing a copy of the lawsuit with the media before it was filed, Cragg waived protections of attorney-client privilege.

Before Trimble's lawsuit was filed, Cragg provided a copy to Star Tribune reporter Rochelle Olson when she met with Trimble and Cragg for a story. Cook and his attorney, Terrance Moore, claim Cragg made untrue statements to the media and in the lawsuit.

Cragg testified under oath regarding these claims, but "declined to answer many questions, asserting that doing so would ... violate Trimble's attorney-client privilege or disclose information that is immune from discovery as work product," the ruling states.

Cook's counsel filed a motion asking the court to force Cragg to share communications between Trimble and her attorneys regarding media strategy and information related to the underlying lawsuit up until when Cragg communicated with media, as well as the basis for Trimble's $13.3 million settlement demand and information related to the "investigation, evaluation, and knowledge of facts underlying the personal-injury action and allegedly defamatory statements made by counsel."

Cragg opposed the motion, but Hennepin County Judge Joseph Klein granted it, requiring Cragg to provide the requested information. Cragg and his counsel appealed.

The Appeals Court had to determine if Cragg was required to follow through with the district court's order.

In the 20-page unanimous three-judge panel decision, Judge Jennifer Frisch wrote the district court abused its discretion by ordering Cragg to disclose certain protected information.

Frisch also ruled that the district court improperly determined Cragg waived attorney-client privilege protection by sharing the lawsuit before it was filed.

To preclude Cragg from following the district court's order, Frisch granted what is known as a "writ of prohibition," essentially overriding the enforcement of the district court's order.

"A writ of prohibition is an appropriate remedy when a district court orders the production of information that is clearly not discoverable and there is no adequate remedy at law," Frisch wrote.

According to the ruling, Cragg gave Olson a copy of the lawsuit Nov. 9, 2021, shortly before it was filed. It contained allegations of assault, battery and false imprisonment.

Frisch wrote that the Appeals Court is "unaware of any authority supporting the proposition that the pre-filing sharing ... can result in a waiver of the attorney-client privilege."

Trimble's personal-injury action is currently pending in Dakota County District Court and was not the subject of appeal court proceedings.

In July, a since-sealed court filing in that case revealed that Cook offered Trimble $1 million to clear him of wrongdoing despite Trimble's previously sworn abuse allegations against him.

Messages seeking comment were not immediately returned by Cragg.

Moore, Cook's attorney, said in an interview Monday that he is considering all options, including appealing the ruling up to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

"We are still digesting the full impact of the order and considering our options," Moore said.

"It's documents that the Court of Appeals says we don't get, and we've got plenty already."