that the attorney-client privilege attaches to any particular item or items identified by the subpoena. Mr. S.’s assertion of privilege is especially weak because the documents listed in the subpoena — HUD statements, closing statement, sales contract(s) and records of payment indicating the source and type of funds used — would all have been revealed at the closing and are, therefore, not confidential in nature. See, e.g., In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 831 F.2d 225, 227-28 (11th Cir.1987) (noting that the attorney-client privilege did not apply to closing statements and purchase contracts for property transactions because the documents “lack a confidential nature” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); United States v. Aronson, 781 F.2d 1580, 1581 (11th Cir.1986) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>); United States v. McDonald, 313 F.2d 832,
holding attorneyclient privilege protects disclosure of communications but does not protect client from disclosure of underlying facts holding that governmental entities may assert attorneyclient privilege to prevent disclosure of information otherwise required by statute holding that the information is not protected by attorneyclient privilege holding that the inadvertent disclosure of a privileged document does not waive the attorneyclient privilege if attorney took all reasonable steps to avoid disclosure and asserted the privilege as soon as the disclosure became known holding that certain documents regarding the disposition of real estate which by their very nature contemplate disclosure to third parties  are not within the scope of the attorneyclient privilege