Intra Law Firm Communications Regarding Questionable Attorney Conduct.

King, Evan & Parness, Jeffrey A.

Journal: St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Volume: 5

First Page: 2

Year: 2014

Bluebook Citation: 5 ST. MARY'S J. LEGAL MAL. & ETHICS 2 (2014)

Author: Evan King: all 2 publications


Abstract

When questions are raised regarding a law firm attorney's representation of a firm client, the questioned attorney often wishes to seek legal counsel. A conferral will often benefit the attorney, the firm, and the client. Conferences regarding questioned conduct should be encouraged, not discouraged. To encourage these beneficial conferrals, a broad attorney-client communication privilege and a broad work-product protection (or privilege) should be available.

Availability should not be dependent upon whether in-house, outside, or other legal counsel is employed. While earlier federal precedents were split regarding the availability of the attorney-client communication privilege in the in-house counsel setting, increasingly therein the privilege is recognized by state high courts. In addition, work-product protections should often be available to legal counsel advising questioned attorneys. Because of current federal-state and interstate differences in the two immunities from compelled involuntary disclosure, conferring legal counsel and questioned attorneys must proceed cautiously.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.