This case deals with the issue of employer email policies. Additionally, the case states that employees cannot expect that their communications won't be monitored. This essentially negates the ability of the employee to argue that the privilege should apply to emails that were sent between him and his own personal lawyer.
Nationwide v. Fleming, Brief for Plaintiff-Appellants. Docket No. 32 WAP 2007; Appeal From the Order of the Superior Court on May 21, 2007 in No. 207 WDA 2005, Which Affirmed Order Entered on January 25, 2005 in Court of Common Pleas of Butler County, Civil Division, No. EQ 99-50018. The Superior Court held the confidential memorandum sent by Nationwide's in-house senior counsel to senior officers, executives, and attorneys was not privileged as it was not a communication from the client to the attorney and did not include confidential information. This brief argues confidential communications are not only from client to attorney, but also attorney to client, and related to pending and future litigation and reflected confidential information previously shared by the client with the attorney, as well as attorney's legal advice.
A brief alleging that the attorney-client privilege is socially beneficial and critical to our system of justice and failing to protect confidential communications of legal advice from a lawyer to a client would significantly harm the attorney-client privilege.
A final order determining the revocation of a Conditional Leniency Agreement to have been fundamentally unfair.
After an evidentiary hearing and careful review of the record, including the parties' post-hearing supplemental briefs, exhibits, and proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, the court made findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Stolt-Nielsen case.
A credit application with a personal guaranty clause included. Permits #1 company to sell merchandise to #2 company on credit or other
terms, without binding #1 company.
An article reviewing the European Court of First Instance's Akzo Nobel v. Commission decision regarding attorney-client privilege between in-house counsel and corporate officers.
September 20, 2007-Nonprofit Organization Committee Comment Letter, Form 990