he attorney work product doctrine is a relatively recent development in American jurisprudence. While the attorney-client privilege traces its roots to English common law, the work product doctrine was developed in the mid-20th century when courts recognized the need to protect an attorney’s mental thoughts and impressions
06/30/2010 1 Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine Attorney-Client Privilege Elements. • Legal advice of any kind is sought • From a professional legal advisor in that capacity • Communications made for that purpose • In confidence • By the client • At the client’s instance permanently protected • Unless privilege is waived. Attorney-Client Privilege Purpose.
Overview. The work product doctrine states that an adverse party generally may not discover or compel disclosure of written or oral materials prepared by or for an attorney in the course of legal representation, especially in preparation for litigation. However, under Rule 26 (b) (3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure , an adverse party may discover or compel disclosure of work …
In some ways, the work product doctrine is broader than the attorney-client privilege because its protections are not limited solely to communications or confidential matters. However, the work product doctrine is also narrower than the attorney-client privilege because its protections extend only to documents and other tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of litigation.
Protects documents and tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of litigation by (or for) another party or its representative from disclosure to third parties.
Whoever creates work product has the right to assert the privilege – typically attorneys and their clients (or “representatives” of either). So long as it was created in anticipation of litigation and meets the other prongs of the test set out above in No. 1.Jun 5, 2019
Hickman v. TaylorThe work product doctrine was first established in 1947 in the US Supreme Court's landmark case Hickman v. Taylor.
In United States v. Kovel, the Second Circuit found that the attorney–client privilege extended to communications between an attorney and a third-party consultant who acted as an interpreter.Jan 29, 2019
According to the Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute, the “attorney-client privilege refers to a legal privilege that works to keep confidential communications between an attorney and his or her client secret.” On the other hand, the Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute proclaims “the work product ...Mar 17, 2020
A legal doctrine that provides that certain materials prepared by an attorney who is acting on behalf of his or her client during preparation for litigation are privileged from discovery by the attorney for the opposition party.
Work product often overlaps with privileged communications, confidential information, and information subject to client privacy rights. It is thus proper to assert all of them when applicable, even though the applicable law may be somewhat different.
The work-product privilege or doctrine1 originated in the seminal case of Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 67 S. Ct. 385 (1947, in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that statements of witnesses obtained by an attorney prior to trial were privileged and thus protected from discovery.Jul 7, 2021
No later than 100 days after the filing of a lawsuit, clients must be prepared to discuss and make cost-driven decisions on important electronic discovery issues such as: (1) the format in which electronic documents will be produced; (2) the manner in which electronic documents will be preserved by the parties; and (3) ...
4 Thus, while disclosure of client confidences to a third party would ordinarily constitute a waiver of the attorney-client privilege, the Kovel doctrine allows an attorney to engage an accountant to assist in his representation of a client while protecting the confidentiality of communications among the accountant, ...Sep 13, 2012
A Kovel letter is used in very-limited situations, in which an attorney wants to try to extend the attorney-client privilege on matters involving highly-complex accounting/tax situations only. When Kovel is not used correctly, it jeopardizes the attorney-client privilege.