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.
A One-Way Street: Nationwide v. Fleming
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
