Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Internal Investigations And The Evolving Fate Of Privilege, Lucian E. Dervan
Internal Investigations And The Evolving Fate Of Privilege, Lucian E. Dervan
Law Faculty Scholarship
In 1981, the United States Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling in Upjohn Co. v. United States. The decision made clear that the protections afforded by the attorney-client privilege apply to internal corporate investigations. This piece examines the fundamental tenets of Upjohn, discusses some recent challenges to the applicability of privilege to materials gathered during internal investigations, and considers the manner in which the international nature of modern internal investigations adds complexity and uncertainty to the field.
The Anticipation Misconception, Colin P. Marks
The Anticipation Misconception, Colin P. Marks
Faculty Articles
Many commentators and courts have cited to the Supreme Court decision of Hickman v. Taylor as the genesis of the work product doctrine and the requirement that, to be afforded protection, the material in question must be generated “in anticipation of litigation.” The oft quoted policy justification for the protection afforded is that attorneys should be allowed a “zone of privacy” within which to prepare their case for the client. This justification supports limiting protection only to work generated “in anticipation of litigation,” because, presumably, outside of this context there is no need for the “zone of privacy.” However, a …
The Story Of Upjohn Co. V. United States: One Man's Journey To Extend Lawyer-Client Confidentiality, And The Social Forces That Affected It, Paul F. Rothstein
The Story Of Upjohn Co. V. United States: One Man's Journey To Extend Lawyer-Client Confidentiality, And The Social Forces That Affected It, Paul F. Rothstein
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The attorney-client privilege protects information a client provides an attorney in confidence for the purpose of securing legal advice. But suppose the client is not a person but a corporation and can only speak through its agents and employees. What then are the contours of the privilege? If the corporation's attorney asks an employee for information relating to pending litigation or other legal matters, is the conversation privileged? Some courts said that no communications to a corporate attorney were privileged unless they came from members of the corporate control group, loosely those people who had authority to direct the attorney's …
Beware: What You Say To Your [Government] Lawyer May Be Held Against You - The Erosion Of Government Attorney-Client Confidentiality, Patricia E. Salkin
Beware: What You Say To Your [Government] Lawyer May Be Held Against You - The Erosion Of Government Attorney-Client Confidentiality, Patricia E. Salkin
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.