The MPRE, Complete
Sign in

Client Confidentiality · 6-12% of the exam

6.1.2Every element of the attorney-client privilege

Courts require all four elements because the privilege suppresses relevant evidence; narrow requirements protect the relationship without sheltering information outside it. All four must be present simultaneously: remove one and privilege doesn't attach. Lower-level corporate employees must also satisfy three additional conditions.

Why

Privilege buys candor by hiding evidence a court would otherwise see, and evidence a court cannot see costs whoever needed it. Drawing the requirements narrowly is how that cost stays proportionate: the shelter covers the relationship it was built for, and stops at the edge of it.

Plain English

Privilege attaches where the elements are satisfied together:

  1. an attorney authorized to practice, or reasonably believed by the client to be, acting as an attorney;
  2. a client, including a prospective one;
  3. a communication made for the purpose of obtaining legal assistance; and
  4. a reasonable belief that it would stay private.

A lower-level corporate employee must also meet the further conditions listed below. The client holds the privilege and the lawyer asserts it. Objects are not communications, though the client's statements about them are protected.

All four elements are required for privilege to attach:

  • Attorney: Authorized to practice law, or a person the client reasonably believes is authorized; must be acting as an attorney, not as a friend, business partner, or accountant.

  • Client: Any person or entity seeking legal services, including prospective clients who consult the attorney even if no representation forms — two points below, and the second is the one with conditions attached.
    • High-ranking corporate officials (CEO, CFO, equivalents): always covered.
    • Lower-level corporate employees — all three conditions required:
      • (a) communicated at the direction of a superior;
      • (b) knew the communication was made so the corporation could receive legal advice; AND
      • (c) the subject matter falls within the employee's duties.

  • Communication: Information transmitted between attorney and client (or their agents) for the purpose of obtaining legal assistance — two points, and the second one cuts both ways:
    • Agents who preserve privilege: lawyer's paralegal, secretary, retained expert; client's interpreter or guardian.
    • Eavesdroppers don't destroy privilege, though a court may prevent an eavesdropper from testifying. An unnecessary third party DOES.

  • Confidential: The communicating person reasonably believed the communication would remain private. Discussing the case where others can easily overhear eliminates this expectation.

Duration: Perpetual; survives the end of representation and the client's death.

Who holds privilege: The client. The lawyer asserts it on the client's behalf when the client is absent.

Inadvertent disclosure — no waiver when both conditions hold: (1) The lawyer took reasonable steps to prevent disclosure. (2) The lawyer promptly took reasonable corrective steps after the slip.

Intentional waiver — three grounds: (1) Failure to claim privilege, by the client or by the lawyer asserting it on the client's behalf, when an opportunity arises. (2) Intentional revelation of a significant part of a privileged communication; waives only that communication. (3) Putting the legal advice at issue in litigation (e.g., a malpractice suit on that advice); waiver reaches only matters put at issue.

Objects are not communications: Physical items the client hands to the lawyer are not privileged. The client's statements about those items are protected.

Example 1

Ex. 1

Ana directs warehouse manager Ben to join a call with outside counsel Carla about a shipping-log discrepancy that falls within Ben's job duties; Ben knows the call is for legal advice. Just before it begins, Dan from HR dials in uninvited to take notes for HR's own separate files. Ben's statements are privileged: all three lower-level conditions are met. Dan's presence destroys privilege for any portion Dan observes; Dan was uninvited and serves an independent purpose. Line up Ben against the three conditions, then name what put Dan on the call: HR's own files.

In a corporate scenario, the exam drops one of the three lower-level-employee conditions and counts on you to miss it. The missing prong is most often direction from a superior; its absence defeats privilege even when the other two conditions are clearly met.

The exam will place a co-worker in the room and ask whether privilege is automatically destroyed. Not automatically. A necessary agent (paralegal, interpreter, retained expert) preserves privilege; an uninvited outsider with a separate purpose destroys it.

Tip

Questions · 2

Q 01ch06-e03

Question 1 of 2 · Rule 1.6

Employee worked as a shift supervisor at a warehouse owned by Corporation. While sorting paperwork one morning, Employee noticed on her own that a batch of outgoing shipments had been labeled with the wrong hazard class, a subject squarely within her job duties. No supervisor asked her to look into the labels or to report anything about them. On her own initiative Employee emailed Counsel, the company's in-house lawyer, describing what she had found and asking whether the mislabeling exposed Corporation to liability; she understood that she was seeking legal advice for the company. In later litigation Plaintiff sought a copy of the email, and Corporation withheld it as privileged. Was the claim of privilege proper?

Keys 1 to 4 choose.

Press 1 to 4 to choose · Enter to check
6.1.2 Every element of the attorney-client privilege · Chapter 6 · Open Bar Review