In oral arguments on Wednesday, the California Supreme Court will be asked to decide whether factual information -- such as witness statements and fact summaries -- is as privileged in opinion letters as the legal advice being given. Specifically, the court will be asked to decide whether trial court judges may conduct in camera reviews of opinion letters and then share redacted versions of them with the opposing party.
September 01, 2009 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
While working with Costco Wholesale Corp. on a wage-and-hour issue nine years ago, Los Angeles attorney Kelly Hensley put together a 22-page opinion letter containing legal advice and factual information gleaned from two company managers.
Little did the Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton partner realize that letter would result in a years-long battle over attorney-client privilege — one that Wednesday goes before the California Supreme Court during oral arguments in San Francisco.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
