myth busting - association of corporate counsel (acc) … myth busting: the attorney-client...
Post on 26-May-2018
213 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1
Myth Busting: The Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine
Kent Sullivan Tom Curvin
March 20, 2012
2 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Myths
• “Everything discussed with my client is privileged.”
• “Everything in my files is work product.”
• “Email communication between the business unit and its external expert is privileged - as long as I am copied.”
• “My analysis of a potential position that the company might take in interpreting certain regulations is work product.”
3 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Busting: The Basics
Attorney-Client PrivilegeProtects confidential disclosures between attorney and client (in most places) made for the purpose of securing legal adviceSee Fed. R. Evid. 501 and Tex. R. Evid. 503(b)
Work Product DoctrineProtects materials prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trialSee Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3) and Tex. R. Civ. P. 192.5
4 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Confidentiality
• Prohibitions against disclosure of confidential information:
Model Rules of Prof’l Conduct R. 1.6 Texas Disciplinary Rules of Prof’l Conduct R. 1.05
• Confidentiality Protection: Broader than the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine
• Practice Tip: As a default, behave as though all information related to the representation is confidential
6 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
What Qualifies?
Restatement of the Law (3d) of the Law Governing Lawyers § 118:
Communication (oral, written, attorney notes re same)Made between privileged personsIn confidenceFor the purpose of seeking, obtaining or providing legal assistance
7 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Privileged Persons: Generally
• Narrow view: Only client confidential information is covered
• Broad view: Communications from attorney to client (and among attorneys) are covered, even if the particular communication does not specifically disclose client confidences
But, this is NOT the rule everywhere, contrary to popular belief
• Practice Tip: Communications to the client should be make it clear that an attorney is responding to a request for legal advice based on confidential information received from the client
8 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Privileged Persons: Corporate Client
• “Subject Matter” test: Made for the purpose of securing legal adviceCommunication was authorizedSubject matter within scope of employee’s dutiesStayed within the “need to know”
See Upjohn v. United States, 449 U.S. 383 (1981); In re Monsanto Co., 998 S.W.2d 917 (Tex. Ct. App. 1999)
• “Control Group” test: much narrower
9 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Privileged Persons: External Experts
• Privileged only if necessary to assist the lawyer in giving legal advice
• Examples:AccountantInvestment BankerPublic Relations Professional
• Practice Tip: Have the attorney communicate with the external professionals, not the client, if the goal is to protect the work via privilege
10 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
“For the Purpose of Seeking Legal Advice”
• Legal advice, not business advice, is protected
• Lawyers as “cc’s” on a document: doesn’t work
• When lawyers wear two hatsIn-house counsel in dual rolesOutside counsel giving business advice on a deal
• Practice Tip: Legal advice must predominate
11 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Internal Investigations: Upjohn
Upjohn warning is necessary when working with employees, management and staff during an internal investigation:
Who you representPrivilege belongs to the company; only the company can waiveMay want to inform if agreed to produce report or interviews to government or othersMemorialize that warnings are given (some use written warnings that employees sign)Keeping interviews confidentialAnswering questions
Practice Tip: A designated note-taker appointed by counsel is often useful to note warning and track documents used during interviews
See Upjohn Co. v. United States, 449 U.S. 383 (1981); United States v. Ruehle, 583 F.3d 600 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Ring, 628 F. Supp. 2d 195 (D.D.C. 2009)
12 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Internal Investigations: Privilege Protection
Practice Tips: Maintain up front Use of outside counsel may help preserve privilegeCounsel can retain forensic experts
Versus use of internal resourcesTake care in creating report and circulating reportRegulators have moved away from requesting waivers; “cabined” requests
13 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Internal Investigations: Ethics
• Attorneys have an ethical obligation to make clear to employees and other unrepresented persons who the attorney represents
See Model R. Prof’l Conduct 1.13(f); Tex. Disciplinary R. Prof’l Conduct 1.12(e); Model R. Prof’l Conduct 4.3; Tex. Disciplinary R. Prof’l Conduct 4.3
• Tex. Comm. on Prof’l Ethics, Op. 487 (Dec. 1992): Where a conflict arises between the employer and the employee, an attorney may withdraw from representation of the employee and continue to represent the employer as long as both employer and employee were advised of the potential adverse consequences of a joint representation
14 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Licensing: Why important?
• Potential basis for attack on privilege See Gucci America, Inc. v. Guess?, Inc., No. 09-cv-4373 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 8, 2010) (Gucci I); No. 09-cv-4373 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 3, 2011) (Gucci II); Fin. Tech. Int’l, Inc. v. Smith, 49 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 961 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)
• Prohibitions against unauthorized practice of law
See Model R. Prof’l Conduct 5.5; Tex. Disciplinary R. Prof’l Conduct 5.05.
16 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Confidentiality
If client doesn’t intend or expect information to be kept confidential, it isn’t privileged
Security prospectuses
Tax returns
Filings with regulatory agencies
Press releases
17 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
“Transaction Work Product” - Privileged?
• Material in corporate lawyer’s files: draft contracts, prospectus, by-laws, opinion letters
• General rule: Do not expect it to be privileged
• Exception: Drafts that contain confidential information that was not included in the final version
• If circulated to bankers, lawyers on other side, it is not privileged
• Practice Tip: Avoid distributing privileged material to outside third-parties
19 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
What Qualifies?
• Prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial
• Prepared by party, attorneys, and other representatives of party or attorneys
20 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Prepared in Anticipation of Litigation
Timing + Motivation
• Litigation must be pendingor threatened or at least very likely (according to the most liberal approach)
• Information motivated bylitigation
Not prepared in ordinary course of businessWould have been prepared absent litigation: not protected
21 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Case Study: Broadcom
Protected as Attorney-Client Privileged?
Protected as Work Product?
23 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Voluntary Disclosure
• Attorney-client PrivilegeAny waiver to non-privileged person = waiver
• Work productWaiver to adversary or conduit to adversary = waiver
• Example: Auditors
24 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
“Limited” or “Selective” Waiver
• Disclosure to adversary in litigation for tactical reason, such as settlement
• Does it work?WaiverEven with confidentiality agreementCan’t pick and choose
• Proposed Fed. R. Evid. 502 dealt with this, but failed
25 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Waiver: Scope and Implications
• Attorney-client privilege: subject matter waiver often applies
• Opinion work product: typically no subject matter waiver
• Strategic implicationsThis stuff isn’t so bad. (But what about the other stuff?)“Horse out of the barn”Remember other cases, even ones not filed yet
26 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Inadvertent Production
“Oops! Can I have that back?”
• Fed. R. Evid. 502
• Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5)
• Tex. R. Civ. P. 193.3(d)
27 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Inadvertent Production: Ethics
Cooperation:
Model Rules of Prof’l Conduct R. 3.2, 4.4Texas Disciplinary Rules of Prof’l Conduct R. 3.02, 3.04
29 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Who Owns the Privilege?
• Attorney-client privilege: the client, and only the client
• Work ProductAttorney has independent right to protect mental impressions (general rule)Default: Client owns everything it paid forAttorney must show good cause to keep work product confidential from client
30 ©2012 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
Closing Thoughts
• Just because you’re a lawyer, not everything you say or write is privileged
• Even truly privileged and work product documents may see the light of day
Client may see themJudge may see them
• Selective disclosure often doesn’t work: consider the consequences of waiver before you do it
top related