Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Checklist best practices

In-house lawyers perform a variety of functions, including contract negotiator, compliance advisor, business strategist, and litigator. In this fast-paced and varied environment, it is often difficult to analyze (much less predict) how a court might view a privilege claim. These challenges can be exacerbated by the large volume of documents in complex disputes, ever-increasing costs of discovery, and the high stakes of litigation. In this article, we provide practical best practices for in-house counsel to implement now to prepare documents and files for future litigation.

General Privilege Principles

The attorney-client privilege is frequently described as one of the oldest privileges, and most in-house attorneys have a strong working knowledge of core privilege concepts. Under New York law, privilege attaches to “a confidential communication made between the attorney or his or her employee and the client in the course of professional employment.” N.Y. C.P.L.R. §4503(a)(1). Corporations may invoke the attorney-client privilege, and “[t]he privilege applies to communications with attorneys, whether corporate staff counsel or outside counsel.” Rossi v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Greater N.Y., 73 N.Y.2d 588, 591-92 (N.Y. 1989). New York law also protects from disclosure “[t]he work product of an attorney” and other materials “prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party, or by or for that other party’s representative (including an attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer or agent).” N.Y. C.P.L.R. §3101(c), (d).

New York in-house counsel cannot always assume that New York law will govern privilege determinations, however. Depending on the litigation forum and choice of law analysis, privilege issues might be governed by another state’s law, federal common law, or even foreign law. Although many U.S. jurisdictions follow similar privilege principles, there are some significant differences in the details. For example, under federal common law, courts analyze an attorney’s communication with a lower-level corporate employee by applying the five factors in Upjohn Company v. United States, 449 U.S. 383 (1981).

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Law Firms Mentioned


New York Business LitigationBook

New York Business Litigation, edited by David R. Marriott, brings together 15 preeminent attorneys as chapter authors in this New York title published by the New York Law...

Get More Information

America's Claims Executive (ACE) 2020Event

ACE Leadership Forum & Expo is the annual conference for Senior Claims Executives in Insurance organizations.

Get More Information

Banking Litigation & Regulation Forum 2020Event

Delivers the key insights and practical solutions to acutely address the complex minefield of UK banking litigation & regulation.

Get More Information

Commercial Litigation & Arbitration Forum 2020Event

For senior dispute resolution professionals to network and engage through open debate, panels, expert speakers & breakout sessions

Get More Information

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.