Companies that retain financial advisors to assist in transactions necessarily share intimate confidential corporate information with them. But can they safely share legal advice with such advisors without risking a privilege...more
The common interest doctrine can sometimes protect as privileged communications between separately represented clients who share an identical legal interest in litigation, or in anticipation of litigation. But satisfying this...more
Because litigants frequently take an aggressive approach when withholding documents on privilege grounds, courts’ in camera reviews often result in a loss for them. But sometimes courts agree with a litigant’s privilege...more
An entity’s minority shareholders or partners obviously look to the entity’s governance documents when assessing their rights and obligations. On the privilege front, minority owners sometimes aggressively seek the entity’s...more
Lawyers and non-lawyers frequently train their corporate colleagues. Determining any applicable attorney-client privilege or work product protections can implicate a number of variables....more
In the aftermath of the soap opera-like ethical scandal over an undisclosed romantic relationship between a Jackson Walker partner and a Texas bankruptcy judge, an Oregon federal court dealt with discovery of a renowned...more
Unlike the absolute attorney-client privilege (and the absolute or nearly absolute opinion work product doctrine protection), a litigant can overcome the adversary’s fact work product protection if it “shows that it has...more
Companies facing ongoing or threatened litigation must sometimes estimate their likely or possible financial exposure — for internal purposes, reporting to auditors or other reasons. Depending on the circumstances, one would...more
Outside and in-house lawyers may of course normally claim privilege protection for their investigation-related communications, as long as they were primarily motivated by the need for legal advice. Depending on the...more
Several courts have adopted a nonsensical principle that, as one court put it, “[w]hen documents are prepared for dissemination to third parties, neither the document itself, nor preliminary drafts, are entitled to immunity.”...more
Numerous Privilege Points have described cases concluding that advertising agencies are outside privilege protection but inside work product protection (although they normally cannot themselves create protected work product)....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
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
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
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
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
Last week’s Privilege Point described an opinion requiring a corporate party’s witness to disclose communications with his Latham & Watkins lawyers, because he confirmed with that firm his own “commercial understanding” about...more
Unlike an intentional or unintentional express waiver involving actual disclosure of a privileged communication, a litigant can trigger an implied waiver by relying on the fact of such a privileged communication rather than...more