Some readers have asked why Privilege Points have only rarely focused on work product issues in the insurance context. In addition to the sometimes dramatic differences between states’ handling of this issue, a recent case...more
With the growth of litigation funding as a mechanism for financing litigation, companies interviewing and ultimately selecting a funder inevitably share work product with them. In such circumstances, courts must assess (1)...more
As explained in previous Privilege Points, courts frequently must decide which state’s privilege law applies to communications involving several states. Fed. R. Evid. 501 states that federal courts should apply state law but...more
Although lawyers understandably focus mostly on the privilege that they enjoy when communicating with their clients, other professionals (psychiatrists, clergy) also have privilege protection of one degree or another. Does...more
Courts have been scrambling to catch up with the fast and sometimes unpredictable evolution of lawyers’ use of generative AI. Many if not most courts require lawyers to advise them if they relied on AI in preparing filings...more
Last week’s Privilege Point noted the Southern District of New York’s privilege expert’s opinion confirming the modern view that an extrajudicial disclosure of a privileged communication normally does not trigger a subject...more
All lawyers worry that waiving privilege protection for some communications might trigger a damaging subject matter waiver requiring disclosure of related communications. Such a subject matter waiver risk normally does not...more
Some courts understandably conclude that the anticipation of litigation that can assure work product protection also requires the litigant to impose a litigation hold on pertinent documents. Perhaps that is not a perfect...more
Given the bare bones nature of many privilege logs, courts sometimes may be called upon, or themselves decide, to review withheld documents in camera to assess the grounds for the documents’ withholding. A handful of courts...more
Corporate litigants’ privilege logs often trigger privilege disputes about internal corporate communications not involving a lawyer — because the log does not mention a lawyers’ participation. But there are at least two...more
In contrast to the somewhat abstract doctrine-driven attorney-client privilege, courts have described the work product doctrine as “intensely practical.” Their treatment of defendants’ surveillance videotape of personal...more
Most lawyers know that state statutes or common law doctrines often protect communications between spouses – although there is wide variation in such approaches. But there is a lurking danger that all of us should keep in...more
Starting about 50 years ago in the case of Hearn v. Rhay, 68 F.R.D. 574 (E.D. Wash. 1975), some courts recognized a broad “at issue” waiver that could strip away privilege without the holder’s disclosure of or even reference...more
Last week’s Privilege Point described a Nevada federal court ruling that a lawyer’s testimony about non-privileged matters did not waive that fragile protection. Snow Covered Capital, LLC v. v. Fonfa, Case No....more
For obvious reasons, lawyers rarely testify at trial. The ethics rules normally prevent a lawyer from trying a case if she is “likely to be a necessary witness.” ABA Model Rule 3.7. And any lawyer’s testimony presents...more
Under every state’s ethics rules, lawyers not licensed there may temporarily provide legal advice under certain conditions, but normally may not establish a “systematic and continuous” presence there without violating...more
Normally a third party does not have standing to challenge a document subpoena. But what if the subpoena seeks discovery of the third party’s privileged or work product-protected documents in the subpoena target’s possession?...more
Last week’s Privilege Point described an S.D.N.Y. opinion rejecting privilege and work product claims for a document that on its face did not contain legal advice or any allusion to or analysis of anticipated litigation....more
Many if not most clients and even some ill-informed lawyers think they can “make” something privileged through some logistical step — such as marking it as “privileged,” copying a lawyer, inviting a lawyer to a meeting, etc....more
In some cases involving voluminous or complicated privilege issues, courts rely on special masters to make the privilege calls. Courts often call on well-respected private lawyers, or sometimes academics (which not...more
Last week’s Privilege Point described two cases finding that successful plaintiffs had waived work product protection covering their invoices and other attorney’s fees billing documents because they sought attorney’s fees as...more
Under what is called the American Rule, winning litigants normally pay their own attorneys’ fees. But in some situations, they can seek recovery of those fees from the losing adversary. Not surprisingly, such efforts...more
Every court seems to require litigants to log documents they withhold based on privilege or work product claims. Perhaps not surprisingly, hardly any log goes unchallenged by the adversary. Most of these disputes eventually...more
Lawyers frequently act as lobbyists. Not surprisingly, courts have a difficult time distinguishing between protected legal advice and nonprotected lobbying advice....more
In federal courts, it is nearly impossible to successfully file an interlocutory appeal of a trial court’s order requiring production of privileged documents — despite the obvious “cat out of the bag” nature of such rulings....more