Attorney-Client Privilege: Protections and Pitfalls

BROOKLYN, N.Y. - June 8, 2023 - PRLog -- Alex Jones' attorneys had to deal with an inadvertent disclosure to the opposing parties of cellphone records protected by attorney-client privilege during the Sandy Hook massacre defamation case proceeding against him. Understanding how to deal with inadvertent disclosure and what remedies are available is an important aspect of legal practice because attorneys can find themselves (or their clients) suffering from inadvertent disclosure of protected information or, conversely, being presented with inadvertently disclosed documents.

Privilege? What is that? Do I Have It?

In order to understand the legal parameters of returning attorney-client privileged material, it needs to be understood by what is meant when referring to "attorney-client privilege", "inadvertent disclosure of privileged material," and "protective orders ordering the return of inadvertently disclosed information." Remember, the client is the holder of the privilege.

In order to understand the legal parameters of returning attorney-client privileged material, it needs to be understood by what is meant when referring to "attorney-client privilege", "inadvertent disclosure of privileged material," and "protective orders ordering the return of inadvertently disclosed information." Remember, the client is the holder of the privilege.

In today's legal proceedings, New York courts almost exclusively rely upon the common law in their application of "attorney-client privilege." This is evidenced in the case, People v Belge, where the Onondaga County Court ordered the defendant to produce corporate records as per a subpoena duces tecum, but the appellant refused and claimed that these records were protected by attorney-client privilege. The Onondaga County Supreme Court held the defendant in contempt and sentenced them to the Onondaga County Correctional Facility at Jamesville after the defendant rejected the Court's order of providing the records in camera. Upon the defendant's subsequent appeal, the Appellate Court stated that the appellant-defendant was not referring to Fifth Amendment privilege, but rather to the privilege of confidentiality in an attorney-client relationship. The Court ruled that for information to be protected under "attorney-client privilege", there must be an attorney-client relationship, and "the information must have been given with the expectation of confidentiality and for the purpose of obtaining legal…advice."The Court affirmed the Court's ruling that the appellant was contemptuous, but vacated the sentencing and remanded the case back to the Onondaga County Court to allow the appellant to make a disclosure of the records under oath.

Source: https://sewellnylaw.blogspot.com/2023/06/attorney-client-...