6 ms·

Out of interest, if someone contacts you in this manner, do you/they have an implicit attorney/client privilege? Or is it only after you come to an agreement to

by anitil 7y ago

Out of interest, if someone contacts you in this manner, do you/they have an implicit attorney/client privilege? Or is it only after you come to an agreement to represent them? Or is it more of a rule of thumb?

xigency 7y ago
Pop culture says that happens when the first dollar is handed over.
rootusrootus 7y ago
Privilege begins once the client and the attorney have agreed on representation.
henryfjordan 7y ago
There's attorney client privilege the whole time. It does not require money to change hands or an explicit agreement of representation before kicking in (as some others have said). https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/does-the-attorney-client-privilege-apply-havent-hired-the-lawyer-yet.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/does-the-attorney-cl...
- noah_buddy 7y ago
  I don't believe that that link supports the general assertion you're making about there being attorney client privilege the entire time. In this case, if the above lawyer receives a message that is unsolicited, Apple should have no expectation of that privilege/privacy of the communications without some prior agreement. Apple has no way to know that the account is even directly run by the lawyer themself or an aide.
throwaway_USD 7y ago
It is actually an extremely complex analysis that is dependent on the facts and the jurisdiction (applicable law). It simply isn't applicable to my communications with a 3rd party recruiter from LinkedIn which was not regarding legal advice but potential employment, nor did my comment contain any confidential information protected by the privilege. To address some of the other responses (common myths): 1. It does not require the exchange of $1 for the attorney-client privilege to apply. For example attorney-client privilege will generally apply to free consultations and it will equally apply in the case of pro bono (free) legal services from groups such as ACLU or EFF to their clients. 2. Attorney-client privilege does not require an agreement for representation to apply (again think of a consultation before an agreement to represent where the privilege applies). As far as a "rule of thumb" a decent summary by the ABA is: "Nevertheless, there are some rules that generally apply to most, if not all, jurisdictions. For attorney-client privilege to apply to a communication, the general rules require that: (1) the communication be between a client and an attorney (i.e., an individual having a law degree and bar membership, and acting as an attorney for the client) or an agent of an attorney (e.g., a tax accountant, a patent agent, a forensic investigator, a technical analyst, or an expert); (2) the communication be made by the client and contain confidential information; (3) the communication be made outside the presence of a nonprivileged third party; (4) the communication be made for the purpose of securing legal advice; and (5) the privilege has not otherwise been waived. Privileged communications can be written or oral, but only communications between or among “privileged” persons are protected.
- anitil 7y ago
  Thanks for clarifying this. I didn't mean to imply that you'd violated any trust here, I was just curious. And obviously you're being discreet with the use of a throwaway.

by anitil 7y ago

xigency 7y ago

Pop culture says that happens when the first dollar is handed over.

rootusrootus 7y ago

Privilege begins once the client and the attorney have agreed on representation.

henryfjordan 7y ago

There's attorney client privilege the whole time. It does not require money to change hands or an explicit agreement of representation before kicking in (as some others have said). https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/does-the-attorney-client-privilege-apply-havent-hired-the-lawyer-yet.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/does-the-attorney-cl...

noah_buddy 7y ago
I don't believe that that link supports the general assertion you're making about there being attorney client privilege the entire time. In this case, if the above lawyer receives a message that is unsolicited, Apple should have no expectation of that privilege/privacy of the communications without some prior agreement. Apple has no way to know that the account is even directly run by the lawyer themself or an aide.

throwaway_USD 7y ago

It is actually an extremely complex analysis that is dependent on the facts and the jurisdiction (applicable law). It simply isn't applicable to my communications with a 3rd party recruiter from LinkedIn which was not regarding legal advice but potential employment, nor did my comment contain any confidential information protected by the privilege. To address some of the other responses (common myths): 1. It does not require the exchange of $1 for the attorney-client privilege to apply. For example attorney-client privilege will generally apply to free consultations and it will equally apply in the case of pro bono (free) legal services from groups such as ACLU or EFF to their clients. 2. Attorney-client privilege does not require an agreement for representation to apply (again think of a consultation before an agreement to represent where the privilege applies). As far as a "rule of thumb" a decent summary by the ABA is: "Nevertheless, there are some rules that generally apply to most, if not all, jurisdictions. For attorney-client privilege to apply to a communication, the general rules require that: (1) the communication be between a client and an attorney (i.e., an individual having a law degree and bar membership, and acting as an attorney for the client) or an agent of an attorney (e.g., a tax accountant, a patent agent, a forensic investigator, a technical analyst, or an expert); (2) the communication be made by the client and contain confidential information; (3) the communication be made outside the presence of a nonprivileged third party; (4) the communication be made for the purpose of securing legal advice; and (5) the privilege has not otherwise been waived. Privileged communications can be written or oral, but only communications between or among “privileged” persons are protected.

anitil 7y ago
Thanks for clarifying this. I didn't mean to imply that you'd violated any trust here, I was just curious. And obviously you're being discreet with the use of a throwaway.