Attorney Client Privilege With Former Employees In Palm Beach
Description
Form popularity
FAQ
It is a common practice for outside litigation counsel to represent current, and even former, employees of corporate clients during depositions. This practice, however, is governed by ethical rules (and opinions and case law) that must be considered in advance.
There are two major exceptions to the lawyer-client privilege under the California Evidence Code, as discussed below. 2.1. Crime or fraud. 2.2. Preventing death or substantial physical harm.
Rule 4-4.2, Rules of Professional Conduct, provides that, in representing a client, a lawyer cannot communicate with a person the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter unless the other lawyer gives consent.
The United States Supreme Court rejected the control group test in Upjohn v. United States, 449 U.S. 383 (1981). Most courts now apply the Supreme Court's reasoning in that case to corporate privilege claims, including those involving former employees.
Imminent death or harm. Your attorney can't be held to attorney-client privilege if they believe that keeping your confidence would result in death or significant physical harm to someone.
Crime or Fraud Exception. If a client seeks advice from an attorney to assist with the furtherance of a crime or fraud or the post-commission concealment of the crime or fraud, then the communication is not privileged.
The protections of the attorney-client privilege survive indefinitely. This means that the protections remain in place even when the attorney-client relationship ends, no matter if the relationship ends due to voluntary termination or due to the death of one of the parties.
The lawyer-client privilege protects your communications even after the attorney-client relationship ends. Even if you fire your attorney or they terminate the relationship for not paying their fees, they still cannot reveal anything you told them in confidence.