All Articles
Privilege
Waiver Implications of Disclosing Work Product to the Government
Last week's Privilege Point described a court's refreshingly correct acknowledgment that disclosing work product to friendly third parties does not waive that robust protection — in contrast to the more fragile privilege protection.
Read MorePrivilege
Some Courts Understand Work Product Waiver, and Some Don’t
Unlike the very fragile attorney-client privilege (which can be waived even by disclosure to family members), the more robust work product doctrine protection survives disclosure to friendly third parties.
Read MorePrivilege
Are All Government Agencies Part of One “Client” for Privilege Purposes?
Courts take differing positions on the "client's" identity in the government setting. Among other things, such differing positions might affect the waiver implications of one government agency disclosing its privileged communications to another government agency.
Read MoreArtificial Intelligence
Employers Beware: The Rise of AI (Regulation)
Whether companies intentionally integrate AI, or their employees merely experiment with chatbots, employers should assess their current policies, practices and training to keep pace with the law. Accordingly, this article summarizes recent AI regulations that affect employers and offers guidance for evaluating compliance.
Read MoreEmployee Benefits (ERISA)
We’ve Come to the End of the COVID-19 Outbreak Period Road
Federal Regulators Issue New Benefit Plan Guidance
Read MorePrivilege
Delaware Federal and State Courts Disagree About a Key Privilege Waiver Issue
Under some arrangements, major shareholders appoint directors to companies those shareholders partially own. Does such a company waive its privilege by disclosing its privileged documents to a designating shareholder's employees (other than its designated board members)?
Read MorePrivilege
Supreme Court Fumbles Attempt to Define Privilege Standard: Part III
The last two Privilege Points (Part I and Part II) addressed the Supreme Court's abandoned attempt to address the abstract "primary purpose" versus "one significant purpose" privilege standard in the absence of specific facts about particular documents. Interestingly, the Ninth Circuit's In Grand Jury decision mentioned what it called the "because of" test in the work product arena — before noting the inherent differences between the attorney-client privilege and work product protection.
Read More