I. Attorney-Client Privilege A. Purpose Attorney-client privilege “prevents a lawyer from being compelled to testify against his or her client” (Attorney Client Privilege 2011). Therefore, the underlying purpose of attorney-client privilege is to enable a lawyer’s ability to provide clients with competent and accurate legal advice by encouraging them to knowingly divulge information that will remain confidential. Attorney-client privilege applies to oral and written communications and it also protects corporate and individual clients. For example, ABC Company discussing a new contract with a lawyer is covered under the attorney-client privilege. However, there is a crime-fraud exemption that states that mentioning intentions to commit or conceal a criminal or fraudulent act during a meeting with the lawyer results in the waiving of attorney-client …show more content…
Is his communication still covered under attorney-client privilege? If a client voluntarily discloses communications normally covered under attorney-client privilege to an outside third party, the communication is no longer confidential, which mean it is not covered under attorney-client privilege. Therefore, courts across the country are having difficulties determining the limitations of the subject matter waiver. The purpose of the subject matter waiver doctrine is to “prevent partial or selective disclosure of favorable material while sequestering the unfavorable” (DiVito, Haussmann, & Fitzgerald 2013). In other words, litigants are unable to offensively utilize certain communications covered under attorney-client privilege, while also granting attorney-client privilege to remaining communications that block its discovery. In 2012, The Illinois Supreme Court decided to broaden subject matter waiver doctrine limitations as they applied to communications outside the judicial setting (DiVito, Haussmann, & Fitzgerald
The power of executive privilege has been extremely controversial since basically the beginning of the United States as a democratic government. Many saw this power come into a greater public focus particularly during the Nixon presidency and the infamous Watergate Scandal, but the theory and use of executive privilege existed long before Nixon. As in true American fashion, some argue in favor of executive privilege, while others view it in a more negative light. The intense controversy is what makes executive privilege so intriguing to review in a deeper and more in depth analysis. The theory of executive privilege has derived its power throughout evolution of time, a series of presidencies, and quite a few pinpointed circumstances resulting in some very notorious court cases.
A Paralegal is defined by the American Bar Association as a person, qualified by education, training or work experience who is employed or retained by a lawyer, law office, corporation, governmental agency or other entity and who performs specifically delegated substantive legal work for which a lawyer is responsible. Paralegals work under direct supervision of an attorney and follow the same ethical rules of the ABA as a lawyer does. ABA Rule 5.3, states that a lawyer must give such assistants appropriate instruction and supervision concerning the ethical aspects of their employment, particularly regarding the obligation not to disclose information relating to representation of the client, and should be responsible for their work product. Per the State B...
To get ears on Rudy’s case, in terms of his discussions, Great Benefit’s lawyer planted a hidden live feed mic in Rudy’s office. That was an illegal, unfair, and unprofessional violation by them listening in. Rudy eventually found out about the mic and instead of reporting the evidence of them listening in or using the evidence against Great Benefit in court, he used the evidence to make it seem like one of the members of the jury had to do with it (jury tampering). Yet, he used it against the lawyer in court to get back at the lawyer and humiliate him. Though that was kind of clever and hysterical, it wasn’t very professional and responsible for Rudy to do. Henceforth, it was also a violation by Rudy. One other violation Rudy made was the approachment towards the victim, in which he accidently did in the court
In one of Law & Order’s “ripped from the headlines” episodes titled “House Counsel,” a juror in a mob trial is found dead. Law enforcement investigates and learns that the mobster tampered with the juror in order to avoid a conviction and then killed him to keep him quiet. The lawyer defending the mobster is a good friend of Assistant District Attorney Jack McCoy. Later in the investigation, McCoy discovers that his friend may have played a role in the jury tampering. When he suspects his friend is involved, McCoy sees an opportunity to get the mobster and prosecutes the attorney for the murder to leverage information about the mobster. In the end, the lawyer is convicted and the attorney-client privilege between the lawyer and the mobster is dissolved.
A possible flaw of Sarbanes-Oxley is it failed to put up any resistance in thwarting the financial crisis. While the degree to which fraudulent behavior can be traced to the roots of the Great Panic of 2007 will likely be up for eternal debate, it might be telling that Sarbanes-Oxley effectively did nothing. It seems this could indicate that stronger incentives for whistleblowers (such as Dodd-Frank and perhaps other whistleblower protection regimes) are very necessary given the extreme social costs. This conclusion may be hasty, however, given the short time period between the enactment of Sarbanes-Oxley and the crash. Not only is the status of Sarbanes-Oxley still in flux over a decade later, but one has to consider the substantial learning and switching costs associated with a regime with such a substantial ruach. Certainly, this is not to say that additional protections may in fact be necessary given the putative reluctance of lawyers to report fraud, but Sarbanes-Oxley likely needed more time to really crystalize and provide some level of predictability before it can be declared a bust.
Confidentiality involves not divulging to others privilege information entrusted to one without good judgment except in a situation where divulging the information will help solve the problem of the client. In
The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury…nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property… nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"(Cornell). The clauses within the Fifth Amendment outline constitutional limits on police procedure. Within them there is protection against self-incrimination, it protects defendants from having to testify if they may incriminate themselves through the testimony. A witness may plead the fifth and not answer to any questioning if they believe it can hurt them (Cornell). The Bill of Rights, which consists of the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, enumerates certain basic personal liberties. Laws passed by elected officials that infringe on these liberties are invalidated by the judiciary as unconstitutional. The Fifth Amendment was ratified in 1791; the Framers of the Fifth Amendment intended that its revisions would apply only to the actions of the federal government. After the Fourteenth was ratified, most of the Fifth Amendment's protections were made applicable to the states. Under the Incorporation Doctrine, most of the liberties set forth in the Bill of Rights were made applicable to state governments through the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment (Burton, 2007).
College isn't just a great opportunity,but can also be life changing. Attending Harvard University will be one of the greatest opportunity for me, due to their vast activities and outstanding educational programs.
There are three types of Justice discussed in Book 1 of Plato’s Republic which are Retributive, Procedural, and Social Justice. Retributive justice is the type of justice that requires someone to pay back their debts if they took something. According to Cephalus, justice requires ‘repayment’ from those who have taken something. For example, The death penalty can be considered retributive justice because someone may have took a life and now their life will be taken from them in return. Procedural justice is doing good for someone that you are close with but doing harm to someone you do not get along with. Polemarchus believes that justice is doing good to good people and doing bad to bad people. For example, Giving your friend a ride to
Despite the longstanding acceptance and promotion for the crime-fraud exception, it appears that the use of the exception to report fraud has been relatively scant and use of ethical rules to sanction lawyers is similarly rare. For those that may favor private regulation or the ability of the market to dictate its own terms it seems that the equilibrium reached was one without lawyers disclosing of their own accord. This could be just viewed as an information failure problem—even if the ability to report fraud up the ladder was technically already available, lack of knowledge may have prevented lawyers from reporting fraud when they otherwise would have done so.
In the ever-changing world today, companies are continuing to innovate so they can maintain a competitive advantage. In order to keep their ideas secret, companies use legal documents called non-disclosure agreements or confidentiality agreements. Thousands of companies sign these contracts with other businesses and their own employees to ensure that current projects, innovative ideas, or new products are undisclosed from competitors. NDAs provide a level of protection and comfort when disclosing information to another party.
The duty of confidentiality refers to attorneys and their duty to keep their clients confidential information confidential. Clients must have some guarantee that lawyers will not divulge any of their confidential information so that they are able to seek early legal assistance and the duty of confidentiality allows them to do so. This duty also allows the client to feel secure when consulting with an attorney so that the attorney is able to gather all the necessary information needed to provide effective representation. Confidential information is all information that relates to the representation of a client no matter where the information comes from (Orlik, D. Ethics for the Legal Professional. Pp. 80). Even if the information is known publicly it is considered confidential to the attorney and their agents if it is information that relates to the representation of their client.
Privilege is constructed and normalized by the society and it plays a role among the conflicts in a person's life. In the terms of injustice and hardships, it is quite difficult to address these issues and to cope with them. Privilege is a term that is described as an unearned right that is given to an individual for the purpose of a specific power based on one's culture, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc. It's important to acknowledge privilege as many people have rights in some kind of way in which they can also misuse it in negative ways. I am going to discuss the content of "An invitation to narrative practitioners to address privilege and dominance" and reflect aspects of my life which I have greater power and privilege
Being a Lawyer comes with many responsibilities. A lawyer must present you fairly within bounds of the law, meaning with upmost respect. They should be able to talk with you in a timely and effective manner. They should also obey by your rules and decisions unless it is not legal. A lawyer should not create any source of conflict during the time of your case. They must keep your money in an escrow account. A lawyer should also keep client conversations confidential. And last but not least, lawyer should never have a personal relationship with a client. If a lawyer shall fall to abide by the rules they could face ...
The test. The test, www.yourfreecareertest.com, that decided our life, what career we fit into. After thinking hard about the questions and answering in full thought, I was matched with law enforcement for 83%. I was elated when I found out that the category contains a criminal lawyer, which is the profession I always wanted to be apart of. As it matches my personality like pieces of a puzzle. I love to organize, be in control, to present my opinions that feel all the way to my heart, and figure problems out while challenging myself with anything thrown at me. As a lawyer, I would be cheerful to go to an office and sit down to help someone out. Also the pay, with a starting salary of $45,00 and an average salary of $114,300 and more.