Numerous courts have held that corporate employees have no expectation of confidentiality (and thus no privilege protection) when using their employer's server and other communication equipment – if the corporate personnel...more
In a 4-3 vote, the Washington Supreme Court held that an institution's lawyers' communications with former employees did not deserve privilege protection. Newman v. Highland Sch. Dist., No. 90194-5, 2016 Wash. LEXIS 1135...more
Because privilege logs generally require withholding litigants to identify emails' senders and recipients, the absence of a lawyer's name often triggers discovery skirmishes. Not surprisingly, the withholding litigants'...more
The common interest doctrine can sometimes allow separately represented clients to avoid the normal waiver implications of disclosing privileged communications to each other. However, courts take widely varying views of the...more
In nearly every court, the attorney-client privilege protects intra-corporate communications only if their "primary purpose" was the corporation's need for legal advice. How do courts apply this standard? One might think that...more
Last week's Privilege Point discussed a court's consideration of privilege protection for communications with client and lawyer agents. Two weeks later, another court analyzed Debevoise & Plimpton's argument that the...more