The common interest doctrine holds that otherwise privileged attorney-client communications, exchanged between two separately represented parties or their counsel for the purpose of pursuing a joint legal strategy, are privileged from discovery by third parties. The doctrine is an exception to the general rule that conducting an attorney-client communication in the known presence of a third party, or disclosing it to a third party after the fact, destroys or waives any attorney-client privilege that might otherwise attach.
Recently, in Ambac Assurance Corporation v. Countrywide Home Loans,1 the Court of Appeals held that the existence of a joint legal strategy is a necessary, but not sufficient condition, for applying the common interest doctrine. Reversing the Appellate Division, First Department, the Court of Appeals held that the existence of actual or anticipated litigation is additionally required in order for the doctrine to apply. In so holding, the Court of Appeals declined to follow several other federal and state courts that had eliminated such a requirement.
The General Rule
This content has been archived.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]
