3 ms·
not if Rev is being paid for their work. Think of it like an english to spanish translator, a spanish only illegal immigrant can still expect privilege with the
by viggity 11y ago
not if Rev is being paid for their work. Think of it like an english to spanish translator, a spanish only illegal immigrant can still expect privilege with their counsel even if translator is there. Just because a third party is involved doesn't automatically waive privilege, it needs to be a third party unrelated to the case.
- will_brown 11y agoThe Courts will look at the precise role of the third party to determine if the privilege has been waived. Obviously, there is a major distinction in using a interpreter, when the interpreter is essential[1] to further the legal representation. Whereas in the Soylent example, REV is not essential to further the representation, for example the lawyer/client could transcribe the conversation themselves and are only using a 3rd party for convenience. [1]State v. Shire, 850 S.W.2d 923 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) - Because the daughter wasn’t essential in conveying information to the lawyer and wasn’t reasonably necessary to protect her mother’s interests, her presence at the meeting destroyed the privilege.