The US Supreme Court’s upcoming look at whether attorney-client privilege extends to business-related communications has particular implications for employers and their counsel, who routinely exchange information that blends legal and business advice.
The justices last month agreed to take up In re Grand Jury to clarify the standards that federal courts should use to determine what types of information exchanged between a lawyer and a client is privileged and thus protected from disclosure during litigation.
In the case, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in 2021 that a law firm must turn over requested tax-related records because its corporate client primarily sought business, not legal, advice.
But federal appeals courts’ conflicting tests for determining what information is privileged is undermining the doctrine’s purpose of promoting candid communications between clients and their attorneys, particularly in the employment context, legal observers say.
Human resources professionals and managers communicate with in-house or outside counsel about a wide variety of employment issues where legal and business matters often overlap, such as written discussions on compliance with new federal workplace regulations or disciplinary matters.
For example, a manager might seek advice on whether a worker should be fired for poor performance and if...
The incumbent Republican Congressman’s campaign told the Federal Election Commission Tuesday that the independent candidate is making false allegations to the federal agency, which is illegal. C...