The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled that a lower court should not have conducted an “in camera” review to resolve a claim of implied waiver of attorney-client privilege.

However, the appeals court also found that the claim at issue did not impliedly waive that privilege. A father suing his former counsel for alleged legal malpractice in a parental rights lawsuit instead improperly used his privilege “as a shield” to block inquiry into an issue he raised, Judge Michael S. Catlett found.