P alleges he was wrongfully imprisoned for over eighteen (18) years based on a false conviction for murder and rape and that his conviction was based on the Ds' wrongful conduct. Based on the efforts of the Innocence Project the charges against P were dropped in May 2006, after DNA sample results indicated that the samples from the crime scene evidence did not match P's DNA profile. P sued Ds. P filed his motion after he discovered that he inadvertently produced allegedly privileged and irrelevant documents. P argues the documents are protected by the attorney client privilege and work product doctrine. P also claims two documents are protected by the cleric-penitent privilege. P alleges that he took reasonable steps to prevent the inadvertent disclosure. Ds argue that P cannot establish that he took reasonable steps to prevent the inadvertent disclosure and the number and extent of the disclosures support a finding of waiver. Ds argue that P delayed seeking to rectify his disclosure and that the interests of justice are not served by relieving P of his error and that P has not established that the documents in question are privileged.