Content area
Full Text
I. Background: The Attorney-Client Privilege............................... 7
A. Rationale and Requirements.................................................. 7
1. Rationale ............................................................................ 7
2. Requirements..................................................................... 8
B. Confidentiality Requirement and the Waiver Rule ............. 11
1. Overview ............................................................................ 11
2. Confidentiality for an Organizational Client................... 11
3. Waiver of Privilege ........................................................... 12
C. Privileged Parties in Single-Client Matters .......................... 12
1. Overview ............................................................................ 12
2. Client ................................................................................. 12
3. Lawyer ............................................................................... 13
4. Client's Agent.................................................................... 14
5. Lawyer's Agent.................................................................. 15
D. Privilege and Joint Clients..................................................... 15
II. Privilege and Common-Interest Arrangements.......................... 18
A. Development and Rationale of Preventing Waiver by Disclosure in Common-Interest Arrangements.................... 18
B. Overview of Common-Interest Arrangements ..................... 24
1. There must be cooperative activity pursuant to an express or implied agreement to maintain confidentiality 25
2. No party can unilaterally waive privilege except to that party's own communications ............................................ 28
3. Most courts hold that the interest need not be solely in litigation............................................................................. 29
4. There is dispute about the scope of potential application to transactional matters..................................................... 30
5. The common interest doctrine is a shield, not a sword, except in Illinois ................................................................ 38
C. The Roots and Proclamation of the Putative Separate Representation Requirement ................................................. 40
D. State Common Law on the Common-Interest Doctrine .... 45
III. Networks of Related Parties Sharing Interests and the Common Law of Privilege ........................................................................... 46
A. Prototypical Networks: Insurer/Insured and Indemnitor/ Indemnitee .............................................................................. 46
1. Overview ............................................................................ 46
2. Structure of a Typical Liability Insurance Policy ........... 47
3. Privilege Where Insurer Defends..................................... 48
4. Non-Defending Insurers................................................... 50
B. Noninsurance Networks ........................................................ 62
1. Loan Participations ........................................................... 62
2. Tax Planning ..................................................................... 64
3. Affiliated Parties Pursuing a Patent ................................. 65
4. Affiliated but Independent Corporations......................... 68
5. Direct Communications Among Parties to Pending or Threatened Litigation....................................................... 68
C. Summary................................................................................. 70
IV. Networks and Privilege Codifications......................................... 71
A. California ................................................................................ 71
1. Evidence Code .................................................................. 71
2. Oxy Resources California LLC v. Superior Court................. 72
3. Seahaus La Jolla Owners' Association v. Superior Court ...... 76
B. Florida..................................................................................... 78
C. Kansas ..................................................................................... 80
D. Codifications Based on Rejected Rule 503........................... 80
E. Codifications Limiting Common-Interest Sharing to Pending Litigation ................................................................. 84
F. Nevada .................................................................................... 85
G. Utah ........................................................................................ 86
V. ABA Policy on Common-Interest Sharing ................................. 86
VI. Conclusion.................................................................................... 87
Appendix: Cases...