Waiver of the Attorney — Client Privilege Pitfalls for the Unwary

See Wachtel v. Health Net, Inc. 482 F.3d 225, 231 (3d Cir. 2007).

http://www.dartmouth.edu/legal/privilege.html.

89 F.Supp. 357 (D. Mass. 1950).

This case also lists a fifth requirement, that is, that the privilege not be ‘waived’. This requirement is the focus of this article and is discussed in more detail in the following paras.

Upjohn Co. v. US, 449 US 383, 101 S.Ct. 677, 66 L.Ed.2d 584, (US 1981).

The Attorney-Client Privilege, Office of General Counsel, California State University, January 2010; http://www.calstate.edu/gc/Docs/Attorney-Client_Privilege.doc.

It should be noted that ‘confidentiality’ is distinct from ‘privilege’. The former applies, for example, to those sworn to secrecy; the latter operates by application of law and/or doctrine.

Waiver may also result from failure to object to the demand for disclosure in litigation.

Upjohn Co. v. US, 449 US 383, 101 S.Ct. 677, 66 L.Ed.2d 584, (US 1981).

Verschoth v. Time Warner Inc., No. 00 Civ. 1339 (AGS) (JCF), 2001 US Dist. LEXIS 3174 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2001).

Verschoth v. Time Warner Inc., No. 00 Civ. 1339 (AGS) (JCF), 2001 US Dist. LEXIS 3174 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2001).

Id.

Id., at *6–7.

Id.

243 F.3d 565 (Fed. Cir. 2000).

Id. at 565.

Id.

Spahn T.C. (2010) An in-house attorney's guide to Virginia's attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine, http://www.vba.org/section/corporate/An_InHouse_Lawyer's_Guide_to_Virginia's_Attorney-Client_Privilege_and_Work_Product_Doct.DOC; accessed 18 March 2010.