The attorney-client privilege debate in California's federal courts has taken a blue-collar turn. In three separate federal cases, defendants accused of violent or gun-related crimes say the government eavesdropped on their phone conversations with lawyers. The defense bar argues that such communications are privileged and that, if courts decide they aren't, defense lawyers for indigent clients would be forced to rack up huge expenses to personally visit jails for even minor client contacts.
August 18, 2006 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
The erosion of the attorney-client privilege has been the white-collar bar’s top gripe over the past few years.
But over the past month or so — at a time when dozens of companies are waiving privilege in connection with wide-ranging stock options investigations — the privilege debate in California’s federal courts has taken a blue-collar turn.
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.
Truly exceptional Bergen County New Jersey Law Firm is growing and seeks strong plaintiff's personal injury Attorney with 5-7 years plaintif...
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
