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

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


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.

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, Bahgat + Bahgat LLC • The Privacy Firm | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Bahgat + Bahgat LLC • The Privacy Firm on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*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. Or, sign up using your email address.