Two years ago, back in March 2008, we wrote in The Legal about the Superior Court’s then-recent decision concerning the scope of the attorney-client privilege in Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Fleming, 924 A.2d 1259 (Pa. Super. 2007) and Nationwide’s subsequent appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
We anticipated that whatever decision the Supreme Court ultimately rendered in Nationwide would be of significant import to practitioners across the commonwealth (including perhaps most notably in-house counsel) because front and center in the petition for allocatur was the question of whether a lawyer’s advice, as opposed to the client’s confidential communications to the lawyer, is protected by the attorney-client privilege.
This content has been archived.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]
