A three-way circuit split has long plagued the realm of attorney-client privilege on how to treat communications that implicate both legal and non-legal concerns (known as “dual-purpose communications”). Namely, if a lawyer communicates with their client, simultaneously providing legal advice and business advice, is the entire communication protected by the attorney-client privilege? How substantial must the legal … Continue Reading
Back in May, we wrote about a pending motion before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, in which the U.S. Department of Justice and several state attorneys general (“DOJ Plaintiffs”) sought to sanction Defendant Google and compel disclosure of all emails withheld for privilege that legal counsel received but never responded to … Continue Reading
If a request for legal advice goes unanswered, is it really a request for legal advice? According to the U.S. Department of Justice and several state attorneys general (“DOJ Plaintiffs”) in an antitrust action against Google, United States, et. al. v. Google, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the answer to … Continue Reading
Citing new deposition testimony, actor Justin Theroux in a recent motion asked the New York Supreme Court to reconsider its December 2020 denial of Theroux’s motion to compel production of emails that his neighbor, Norman Resnicow, a law firm partner, sent to his personal lawyer about the parties’ quarrel (related to the New York City … Continue Reading
The prosecution of Elizabeth Holmes, founder of the infamous healthcare and life sciences company, Theranos, Inc., has sparked media attention around the country. With just a few months before trial is slated to begin, Holmes recently lost her pretrial battle over whether the attorney-client privilege precludes the introduction of certain emails with counsel. While the … Continue Reading
As though commercial transactions were not already fraught with enough potential pitfalls, a recent decision from the Southern District of New York highlighted yet another risk that could carry significant consequences to commercial litigations – the dreaded waiver of attorney-client privilege.… Continue Reading
Proskauer’s Vice-Chair of the Litigation Department and Minding Your Business blog editor, Margaret Dale was recently featured on Thomson Reuters’ Practical Law, where she explores ways that clients can protect privilege after a data breach. The first, “Protecting Privilege Basics,” identifies steps that can be taken by an organization to maximize the ability to successfully … Continue Reading
Last week, the Florida Supreme Court adopted section 90.5021, Fla. Stat. – Florida’s fiduciary lawyer-client privilege – to the extent it is procedural and held that the decision is retroactive to the Florida legislature’s enactment of the statute in 2011. The statute provides for application of the lawyer-client privilege when that client is a fiduciary, … Continue Reading
In 2011, Florida’s legislature enacted section 90.5021, Fla. Stat., which provides for application of the lawyer-client privilege – even when the client is a fiduciary. Specifically, the statute protects communications between a lawyer, on the one hand, and a client who is a trustee, personal representative or executor, or guardian, on the other hand. The … Continue Reading
While attorneys provide legal advice to their clients, they are sometimes the recipients of such advice from their own counsel, including in-house firm counsel. Agreeing with recent decisions by the highest courts of Georgia and Massachusetts, a panel of the First Department Appellate Division this June handed down a decision declaring such advice protected by … Continue Reading
I. The Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine in the United States and Abroad The attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine are important and well-known concepts to nearly every lawyer in the United States. Generally, the attorney-client privilege shields from disclosure confidential communications between attorneys and clients for the purpose of seeking or rendering legal … Continue Reading
Last Thursday, the New York Court of Appeals issued a stark reminder to transactional lawyers: no matter how much “common interest” two parties may have with respect to a transaction, the common interest doctrine may not protect their communications. In Ambac Assurance Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., New York’s highest court held, in a … Continue Reading
By Joel Cavanaugh and Jacki L. Anderson on Posted in Evidence
In-house counsel often communicate with corporate management under the assumption that these communications are protected by the attorney-client privilege— absent some type of unusual and extraordinary circumstance, such as waiver of the privilege or the crime-fraud exception. A surprising number of both in-house and outside counsel, however, are unfamiliar with the longstanding “fiduciary exception” to … Continue Reading
This website uses third party cookies, over which we have no control. To deactivate the use of third party advertising cookies, you should alter the settings in your browser.
