Attorney-client privilege can attach to communication between a lawyer and a third-party contractor who worked closely enough with a company to be seen as the functional equivalent of an employee, a federal district judge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has ruled.
Without a clear Third Circuit standard on the issue, U.S. District Judge Anita B. Brody of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania relied on U.S. Supreme Court case law in ruling that a contractor for GlaxoSmithKline could be the equivalent of a GSK employee who had communications with company attorneys.
This content has been archived.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]
