CEO, CFO, COO ... Cube Dweller? Attorney-Client Privilege and Corporate Communication: Whose Communications Should Massachusetts Law Protect?

By Flynn, Lisa Borelli | Suffolk University Law Review, Summer 2010 | Go to article overview

CEO, CFO, COO ... Cube Dweller? Attorney-Client Privilege and Corporate Communication: Whose Communications Should Massachusetts Law Protect?


Flynn, Lisa Borelli, Suffolk University Law Review


"[S]o numerous and complex are the laws by which ... citizens are governed, so important is it that they should be permitted to avail themselves of the superior skill and learning of those who are sanctioned by the law as its ministers ... without publishing those facts, which they have a right to keep secret, but which must be disclosed to a legal adviser ... to enable him successfully to perform the duties of his office, that the law has considered it the wisest policy to encourage and sanction this confidence, by requiring that on such facts the mouth of the attorney shall be for ever sealed." (1)

I. INTRODUCTION

"The attorney-client privilege is the oldest of the privileges for confidential communications." (2) The privilege is essential to the success of the attorney-client relationship and the ability of an attorney to provide competent representation to clients. (3) There must be, however, a balance between protecting client confidences and fulfilling the truth-seeking function of the discovery process. (4) Over the past several decades, courts have struggled to find this balance in the application of attorney-client privilege to corporations. (5)

Courts have faced unique issues in applying attorney-client privilege--a privilege generally associated with communication between persons--to the form of the corporation, technically a legal fiction. (6) Yet, a corporation as a fictional entity can only act through its employees. (7) The dilemma thus arose of how far down into the corporate structure to apply the privilege. (8) Courts developed two main tests for defining the privilege's scope in the corporate setting: the narrow "control group" test and the broader "subject matter" test. (9)

In Upjohn Co. v. United States, (10) the Supreme Court rejected the "control group" test, pronouncing it too narrow an application of privilege law with regard to corporations. (11) Upjohn gives broader protection to confidential communications by employees who supply information to corporate counsel that is relevant to a particular legal action. (12) Upjohn, however, is binding only in federal question cases that use federal common law to decide privilege questions. (13) Upjohn does not bind state courts and many states do not follow it, having adopted the control group test, a modified subject matter test, or no definitive approach at all. (14) Massachusetts has not considered how to apply the privilege within a corporation, but has confronted like questions with respect to corporations--namely the issue of ex parte contact with employees of a corporation in connection with professional ethics matters. (15)

Part II of this Note discusses the current state of attorney-client privilege law with respect to corporate communications. (16) It first provides a brief overview of privilege law and introduces the public policy argument that the pursuit of truth in litigation demands restriction of attorney-client privilege rather than expansion to cover more communications, especially within the corporate context. (17) It then outlines the development of the two basic tests for determining the scope of corporate privilege and discusses the Upjohn decision and its effect on the approaches of various states. (18) Part II goes on to explain Massachusetts's approach to an analogous issue and introduces Commissioner of Revenue v. Comcast Corp., (19) a case the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) recently decided that involved questions of privilege with respect to corporate communications involving third-party consultants. (20) While the SJC did not specifically address the scope of attorney-client privilege within the corporate structure in this case, its discussion demonstrates that determining the boundaries of corporate privilege is an unresolved issue in Massachusetts. (21)

Part III of this Note analyzes which test best balances the valued function of attorney-client privilege with the essential truth-seeking function of discovery. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

CEO, CFO, COO ... Cube Dweller? Attorney-Client Privilege and Corporate Communication: Whose Communications Should Massachusetts Law Protect?
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.