A little more than a year ago, using now well-known language, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court declared that the attorney-client privilege is a “two-way street.” In Gillard v. AIG Insurance Co. , the court held that the protections of the attorney-client privilege apply both to communications from an attorney to the client, as well as to communications from the client to the attorney.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Gillard was well-received by the legal community. Headlines proclaimed that the attorney-client privilege is “revived and well” and “you have the right to speak to your client.” But the import of Gillard can best be appreciated in the context of the case it overturned.
