The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled that a lower court should not have conducted an “in camera” review to resolve a claim of implied waiver of attorney-client privilege.
However, the appeals court also found that the claim at issue did not impliedly waive that privilege. A father suing his former counsel for alleged legal malpractice in a parental rights lawsuit instead improperly used his privilege “as a shield” to block inquiry into an issue he raised, Judge Michael S. Catlett found.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
