Although there are minor variations, the elements necessary to establish the attorney–client privilege generally are:
Full Answer
Practice Tip: The Attorney-Client Privilege and Former Employees. The Attorney-Client Privilege and Corporations in General The attorney-client privilege protects communications: 1) between a client and his or her attorney; 2) that are intended to be, and in fact were, kept confidential; 3) for the purpose of obtaining or providing legal advice.
Communications made by and to non-attorney employees serving as agents of attorneys in internal investigations are protected by the attorney-client privilege. A communication made as part of an internal investigation must be primarily or predominantly of a legal character to be privileged.
Legal precedent demonstrates that there may be room for debate regarding whether the scope of the attorney-client privilege will encompass all discussions and fact-gathering that attorneys may engage in with a former employee in preparation for any kind of testimony, if those efforts are not focused on the proper, protected subject matter.
Attorney-client privilege is waived by disclosing the substance of the communication to a third party. Waiver can be voluntary or involuntary (accidental).
The attorney-client privilege protects most communications between clients and their lawyers. But, according to the crime-fraud exception to the privilege, a client's communication to her attorney isn't privileged if she made it with the intention of committing or covering up a crime or fraud.
United States, the US Supreme Court determined that communications between current employees and the corporation's lawyers are protected by the attorney-client privilege, and a concurrence suggested extending that to former employees, but courts nationally are split on whether and how to apply that privilege to former ...
Virtually all types of communications or exchanges between a client and attorney may be covered by the attorney-client privilege, including oral communications and documentary communications like emails, letters, or even text messages. The communication must be confidential.
Is that conversation privileged? The federal standard would suggest that privilege applies, so long as the conversation is confidential and the employee is seeking legal counsel about employment. But the California standard clouds up the legal skyscape.
An e-mail from your attorney is privileged, but once you forward it to anyone not covered by the privilege, the e-mail is no longer a confidential communication. Inadvertent waiver is particularly a risk with e-mail software containing an auto-text feature that automatically completes e-mail addresses.
To ensure confidential status in a privileged communication relationship, the communication made between the two parties must take place in a private setting–for example, a meeting room–where the parties have a reasonable expectation that others might not overhear them.
Legal advice privilege protects communications between a lawyer and client that are made for the sole or dominant purpose of giving or receiving of legal advice. This includes communications that form part of a continuum which aims to keep client and lawyer informed so that legal advice may be given as required.
Emailed correspondence between attorney and client is privileged. However, the client can take some actions which will waive this attorney client privilege.
The difference? Very simply put, attorney-client privilege stems from rules of EVIDENCE, whereas confidentiality stems from rules of ETHICS. But that's not all. Starting with confidentiality, every state has Rules of Professional Conduct that apply to lawyers who are licensed in that state.
The so-called Upjohn warning takes its name from the seminal Supreme Court case Upjohn Co. v. United States,1 in which the court held that communications between company counsel and employees of the company are privileged, but the privilege is owned by the company and not the individual employee.
The attorney-client privilege is the oldest privilege recognized by Anglo-American jurisprudence. In fact, the principles of the testimonial privilege may be traced all the way back to the Roman Republic, and its use was firmly established in English law as early as the reign of Elizabeth I in the 16th century.
Conn. 1999). The Peralta court concluded that: 1) privileged information obtained by a former employee while employed by the corporation; and 2) communications between the former employee and corporation's counsel for the purpose of educating counsel about relevant facts known to the former employee are privileged.
A communication is not confidential, and therefore not privileged, if it is overheard by a third party who is not an agent of the listener. Agents include secretaries and other employees of the listener.
Common exceptions include the following: A counselor formally reporting to or consulting with administrative supervisors, colleagues or supervisors who share professional responsibility (i.e. in this instance all recipients of such information are similarly bound to regard the communication as privileged);
Confidentiality can be defined in terms of a counselor's duty not to disclose information about their client, while privileged communication in a counseling context can be defined in terms of a client's privilege not to have their counselor disclose information about them in a legal setting such as a court of law.
What Is Privileged Communication? Conversation that takes places within the context of a protected relationship, such as that between an attorney and client, a husband and wife, a priest and penitent, and a doctor and patient. The law often protects against forced disclosure of such conversations.
Attorney-client privilege is waived by disclosing the substance of the communication to a third party. Waiver can be voluntary or involuntary (accidental).
What is privileged? The attorney-client privilege protects: A communication. Between privileged persons (attorney, client, or in some cases, an agent) Made in confidence.
Examples of legal functions: Advising company on existing law. Analyzing conduct for conformity with law or judgments regarding law. Advising on imminent litigation.
In board meetings, conference calls and other meetings: When discussing legal matters, Board meeting minutes should indicate clearly that: In-house counsel attended in his/her role as legal advisor. Discussions were for the purpose of providing legal advice. Discussions were confidential and intended to be privileged.
Ordinarily, communication between counsel and a public relations/crisis management firm is not considered privileged unless the party asserting the privilege can show that the communication was necessary for the client to obtain informed legal advice.
Consider excluding from privileged discussions any observer or third party whose presence may prevent a claim to privilege (investment bankers, auditors, consultants).
An investigative report that is sent to an attorney or even authored by an attorney must still be primarily or predominantly of a legal character to be privileged. Under most circumstances, production of information to the Government waives privilege as to that information in subsequent civil suits.
Generally speaking, communications between an attorney and a client, or a potential client, are privileged. This means that the communications must remain confidential. The privilege is held by the client and so only the client has the authority to waive the privilege.
Attorney-client privilege is a cornerstone of the criminal justice system in the U.S. The legal system has recognized that the ability of a client to freely communicate with his or her attorney outweighs the desire of a court to have unrestricted access to all of the information gatherable.
The attorney-client privilege may be used when a complaint involves serious concerns (including potential criminal claims), may develop into a lawsuit, or may have the potential to impact a large number of employees (e.g., class action status), among other considerations. It is always best to contact your legal department in advance of launching an investigation when you suspect that the gravity of the situation may give rise to significant liability. So be sure to discuss upfront whether your in-house counsel or outside defense attorney wants any particular emails or document exchanges protected. Further, if you have any question whether or not you should be invoking the attorney-client privilege, always err on the side of caution and protect the documentation trail as much as possible.
Rule 1: Address communications to your attorney. This could be your in-house counsel or outside counsel, but for the attorney-client privilege to become effective, it must be addressed to an attorney who is providing legal advice and counsel. The privilege does not protect communications between workers when no attorney is present. In other words, you can't send an email to your non-attorney boss and mark it "privileged and confidential" because without an attorney on the receiving end to provide legal analysis and advice, there's no mechanism to protect the communication from legal discovery.
While you may hope that you never need them, it's wisest to bring yourself up to speed with certain elements of "Business Legal 101" to protect yourself and your company from unwanted legal exposure.
Again, not all attorney-client communications will be deemed privileged once submitted in court, so always proceed with caution and continue to communicate in writing as if your document may be used as evidence in court at some point and blown up and placed in front of a jury.
SHRM provides content as a service to its readers and members. It does not offer legal advice, and cannot guarantee the accuracy or suitability of its content for a particular purpose. Disclaimer
Just because you mark a document "Privileged and Confidential" doesn't mean that a plaintiff's attorney won't challenge the privilege and that a court won't overturn it. Therefore, let caution rule the day when it comes to exchanging emails, documents, or other electronic communications that you mark privileged.
In other words, you can't send an email to your non-attorney boss and mark it "privileged and confidential" because without an attorney on the receiving end to provide legal analysis and advice, there's no mechanism to protect the communication from legal discovery.
The attorney-client privilege protects communications: 1) between a client and his or her attorney; 2) that are intended to be, and in fact were, kept confidential; 3) for the purpose of obtaining or providing legal advice. United States v.
Attorneys can take refuge in the attorney-client privilege, however, if they ensure that communications with former employees remain within the realm of subject matters that courts have clearly outlined as protected by the privilege. Avoid scripting witnesses either verbally or with writings.
Yet, the Peralta holding has not been universally accepted. For example, in Infosystems, Inc. v. Ceridian Corp., a Michigan district court stated that Peralta "sweeps too broadly" regarding the former employee's activities or knowledge acquired during their employment. 197 F.R.D. 303, 304-305 (E.D. Mich. 2000). In Upjohn, and in Chief Justice Burger's concurrence, the invocation of the privilege was based partially on the fact that the employee (or in the case of Burger's comments, the former employee) spoke at the direction of management. The Infosystems court's criticism stems from Peralta's apparent omission of this factor. Consequently, the court in Infosystems, declined to apply Peralta's holding broadly and noted that "counsel's communications with a former employee of the client corporation generally should be treated no differently from communications with any other third-party fact witness." Id. at 306.
Overall, attorneys should think actively and intentionally about the attorney-client privilege and its application to their practice. With each of the above practice points in mind, attorneys can predictably and successfully draw a clear line between privileged and discoverable communications.
Id . at 41. Therefore, the attorney-client privilege would not apply to information given y corporate counsel to a former employee regarding the testimony of other witnesses, or to discussions between the former employee and corporate counsel on how to answer questions.
The Peralta decision also noted that some communications between a former employee and the corporation's counsel may also be protected under the work-product doctrine. Recall that the work-product doctrine announced in Hickman v.
Do not share work-product, litigation strategy or testimony from other witnesses with the former employee. This practice point also focuses on embracing a conservative approach to even presumably privileged communications. If work-product, litigation strategy and other witnesses' testimony are not shared with the former employee, the attorney forecloses the possibility of inadvertent disclosure should a court conclude that any aspect of such matters is not reasonably related to the scope of employment.
In other words, a communication is not privileged if it does not: (1) request legal advice or (2) convey information reasonably related to a request for legal assistance. Thus, asking an attorney about investment advice or other non-legal issues is NOT privileged. Moreover, having a discussion (or email exchange) with an attorney, where others are present (or included) is NOT privileged.
Thus, the question has quickly become when is the attorney-client privilege actually applicable? Simply put, just telling a lawyer something, or copying a lawyer on an email, does not make the conversation or email privileged. Not all communications with an attorney are privileged from disclosure under the attorney-client privilege. The reality is that a communication ( i.e. emails, correspondence, oral communications, etc.) will only be privileged when the subject communication meets certain criteria, and it is confidential (meaning that it is not shared with non-attorney/non-client third parties).