Holmes v. Petrovich Dev. Co. LLC, et al.

Cal. appellate decision holding work email not protected by atty-client privilege

more+
less-

In an apparent setback for Internet and email privacy, this decision by California's Third Appellate District Court held that an employee's work email was not protected by the attorney–client privilege. If there is any upside to this case, the court very clearly based its decision to allow the emails into evidence on the company's written policy, which explicitly stated that company email was not private. In other words, it is unknown whether the California court would have allowed the emails into evidence if the company did not have such a rigid privacy policy.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Written by:

Published In:

Reference Info:Decision | State, 9th Circuit, California | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Joseph Bahgat, Hubcity Law Group | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.
×
Loading...
×