My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003-03 The Attorney-Client Privilege
PublicDocuments
>
Corporation Counsel
>
Legal Opinions
>
2003-03 The Attorney-Client Privilege
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2011 4:44:48 PM
Creation date
7/15/2011 4:44:37 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The advent and prevalent use of e-mail presents other issues of concern. Our <br /> clients often communicate with us via e-mail, and our attorneys often dispense <br /> advice or recommendations using this means. All e-mail communication should <br /> be regarded as privileged and confidential. Please guard against forwarding <br /> these e-mail messages (in part or in total) to any person outside of the County, <br /> as this would serve to compromise the attorney-client privilege. <br /> 5. Can I be held personally liable in a lawsuit, where it is learned I did <br /> not follow the advice of the Corporation Counsel? <br /> Yes. In an extreme case, assume our office provided an opinion on a certain <br /> issue. The department head, as the chief policy maker, disagreed with the <br /> opinion, and decided to act in a contrary manner (as is their prerogative to do <br /> so). <br /> In subsequent litigation directed against the County for alleged harm caused by <br /> the department head's decision, the aggrieved party will never know that the <br /> department head was advised not to take the selected course of action. <br /> However, if there has been a breach of the privilege (e.g., a communication is <br /> found wherein the department indicates they have consulted with Corporation <br /> Counsel, and some of the otherwise privileged discussions are referenced), a <br /> court may be called upon to rule whether the privilege has been legally waived. <br /> If a court finds the privilege no longer exists, all communications relevant to this <br /> issue may arguably be discoverable to the aggrieved party. <br /> Assuming the aggrieved party learns of the earlier privileged communication, the <br /> aggrieved party may then seek punitive damages against the department head <br /> personally, arguing that he/she was placed on notice that the aggrieved act was <br /> illegal, and that the action was therefore done with malice. <br /> Please note that this is an extreme example, intended to demonstrate what could <br /> happen in the "worst case scenario." Nonetheless, we thought it our <br /> responsibility to share with you what we believed was legally possible. <br /> 6. Is it permissible to share a "confidential" opinion or other <br /> communication from the Corporation Counsel with another department, or <br /> the Council? <br /> Yes, on a need-to-know basis, and under confidential cover. We have <br /> historically taken the position that although our attorneys service individual <br /> departments, the County as a whole is considered the "client" for purposes of the <br /> privilege. This is necessary, due to the legal requirements imposed by our laws. <br /> As an example, if a department is involved in litigation, the department head will <br /> 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.