Recently, there have been reports in the press that private investigators may have improperly obtained information about prominent people through illegal methods. In addition to wiretaps, the articles have mentioned the use of “pretext,” which apparently means that the investigators, to convince third parties to disclose confidential information, may have misrepresented that they, the investigators, were actually the prominent people being investigated.

There have been suggestions that some of these investigators were engaged to collect information by lawyers. Indeed, it is often the case that investigators and other types of consultants are hired at a client’s direction by counsel in the hope of cloaking the work of the consultants in privilege. While the applicability of the attorney-client privilege to the communications between consultants and lawyers is limited, if the investigatory work is preformed in anticipation of litigation under the direction of a lawyer, there is a good chance that attorney work product protection will be available.

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

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]