Does the inclusion of a third party on a confidential communication between a lawyer and a client constitute attorney-client privilege?
The following excerpt is from Sampedro v. Silver Point Capital, L.P., No. 19-4339-cv, No. 20-29-cv, No. 20-8-cv (2nd Cir. 2020):
When a communication is "made in confidence for the purpose of obtaining legal advice from the lawyer," the inclusion of a third party on that communication does not necessarily destroy the attorney-client privilege, so long as the inclusion is "necessary, or at least highly useful, for the effective consultation between the client and the lawyer." United States v. Kovel, 296 F.2d 918, 922 (2d Cir. 1961).
Page 11
"[C]ommunications by the client" to his counsel and a third-party "reasonably related to [the] purpose" of having the third-party "interpret [the communications] so that the lawyer may better give legal advice" remain protected. Id. However, the privilege does not extend to communications where the third party merely provides additional "information [the client] did not have" for the lawyer to "advise his client . . . about the legal and financial implications" of an action. United States v. Ackert, 169 F.3d 136, 138-40 (2d Cir. 1999).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
