Attorney Client LD Topic

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege
Topic Wording.....................................................................................................................4 **DEFINITIONS**............................................................................................................. !Attorney"Client Privilege! #egal De$inition%....................................................................& Privilege' #egal Protection o$ Con$identiality in Speci$ic (elation%)ip%............................* Et)ical (e+,ire-ent o$ Attorney Con$identiality Di%tinct $ro- Evidentiary Privilege....... **AFFI(/ATI0E**...........................................................................................................1 Attorney"Client Privilege Con$lict% 2it) Tr,t)"See3ing...................................................45 Attorney"Client Privilege Con$lict% 2it) Tr,t)"See3ing" Adver%arial Sy%te- Con$lict% Wit) Tr,t)..........................................................................................................................46 Attorney"Client Privilege Con$lict% 2it) Tr,t)"See3ing' Only Needed $or #ie% and Fal%e De$en%e..............................................................................................................................4 Attorney"Client Privilege Con$lict% 2it) Tr,t)"See3ing" Con$lict% 2it) Attorney a% O$$icer o$ t)e Co,rt............................................................................................................4& Attorney"Client Privilege Con$lict% 2it) Tr,t)"See3ing" AT' !Evidence Wo,ld Not E7i%t Wit)o,t t)e Privilege!.......................................................................................................4* AT' !Tr,t) See3ing Fr,%trated 8y Ot)er Protection% and Privilege%!..............................4. Tr,t) See3ing S)o,ld Tr,-p' 0ital $or 9,%t O,tco-e%....................................................41 Tr,t) See3ing S)o,ld Tr,-p' :ar-% o$ t)e Attorney"Client Privilege O,t2eig) Advantage%.........................................................................................................................;4 Tr,t) See3ing S)o,ld Tr,-p' De$endant<% (ig)t to Evidence O,t2eig)%.......................;; Tr,t) See3ing S)o,ld Tr,-p' 0ital $or /orality..............................................................;6 Tr,t) See3ing S)o,ld Tr,-p' 0ital $or Societal S,rvival................................................;4 Tr,t) See3ing S)o,ld Tr,-p' P,blic Tr,%t in t)e #egal Sy%te-......................................; Tr,t) See3ing S)o,ld Tr,-p' Tr,t) Critical to Adver%ary Sy%te-..................................;* Tr,t) See3ing S)o,ld Tr,-p' Privilege S)o,ld Not S,rvive Client<% Deat)....................;1 Tr,t) See3ing S)o,ld Tr,-p' Cri-e"Fra,d E7ception Con$ir-%....................................65 AT' !Tr,t) See3ing /ore I-portant to 9,%tice Sy%te- t)at Protection o$ Individ,al A,tono-y!.........................................................................................................................64 S)o,ld Eli-inate Attorney"Client Privilege " 8etter $or 9,%tice.......................................6; S)o,ld Weig) Attorney"Client Privilege in Individ,al Ca%e%...........................................66 Attorney"Client Privilege Not E%%ential to Con%tit,tional (ig)t%" =enerally...................64 Attorney"Client Privilege Not E%%ential to E$$ective De$en%e..........................................6 Attorney"Client Privilege Not E%%ential to Con%tit,tional (ig)t% " Privacy......................6& Attorney"Client Privilege Not E%%ential to Con%tit,tional (ig)t% " >ealo,% Advocacy?Adver%arial Sy%te- 8ad...................................................................................6* Attorney"Client Privilege Not E%%ential to Adver%ary Sy%te-..........................................6. Attorney"Client Privilege Not E%%ential to A,tono-y......................................................61 Attorney"Client Privilege Fail%' Incon%i%tently Applied....................................................45 Attorney"Client Privilege Fail%' Doe% Not Deter /i%cond,ct...........................................46 Attorney"Client Privilege 8ad' Serve% t)e Need% o$ t)e Po2er$,l....................................44 Attorney"Client Privilege 8ad' Serve% t)e Need% o$ t)e Attorney....................................4& AT' !Attorney"Client Privilege Critical A%pect o$ Pro$e%%ional Et)ic%!...........................4. Attorney"Client Privilege Fail%' Wea3 Protection $or Adver%arial Sy%te-.......................41 @tilitarian Fra-e2or3 Fail% to 9,%ti$y Attorney"Client Privilege..................................... 5 /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' Attorney"Client Privilege @nder-ine% 9,%tice Sy%te-................ ; /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice #in3' P,tting (,le% Above Tr,t)"See3ing.................................... 6
/yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice #in3' #egal Di%co,r%e................................................................... /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' !9,%tice! Sy%te- Doe% Not Foc,% on !9,%t! O,tco-e%............... & /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' /oral 9,%tice Di%tinct Fro- Pro$e%%ional Et)ic%......................... * /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' /oral 9,%tice Di%tinct Fro- (eligion.......................................... . Attorney"Client Privilege 0iolate% Fir%t A-end-ent....................................................... 1 S)ielding E7onerating?E7c,lpatory Evidence I--oral....................................................&5 S)o,ld P,t Tr,t) A)ead o$ Privilege Wit) E7c,lpatory Evidence...................................&; Attorney"Client Privilege S)o,ld 8e Treated #i3e Ot)er Privilege%' Sa-e 8alancing....&6 Attorney"Client Privilege S)o,ld 8e Treated #i3e Ot)er Privilege%' D,ty to Di%clo%e T)reat% to =eneral P,blic...................................................................................................&4 AT' !E7ception% Prevent :ar- $ro- Attorney Client Privilege!.....................................& **NE=ATI0E**...............................................................................................................&& Tr,t)"See3ing Not t)e /ain =oal o$ t)e @S 9,%tice Sy%te-............................................&* 9,%tice Sy%te- Fail% at Tr,t)"See3ing...............................................................................&. Attorney"Client Privilege Doe% Not Con$lict 2it) Tr,t)"See3ing' T,rn"Increa%e% In$or-ation........................................................................................................................*5 Attorney"Client Privilege Doe% Not Con$lict 2it) Tr,t)"See3ing' Evidence Wo,ld Not 8e Available Wit)o,t Privilege.........................................................................................*4 Attorney"Client Privilege Doe% Not Con$lict 2it) Tr,t)"See3ing' Narro2ly Tailored" Con$identiality (e+,ire-ent..............................................................................................*; Attorney"Client Privilege Doe% Not Con$lict 2it) Tr,t)"See3ing' Co,rt% Care$,lly Weig) Co%t%?8ene$it%....................................................................................................................*6 Attorney"Client Privilege En)ance% Tr,t)"See3ing..........................................................*4 Privilege Fail% to Increa%e Tr,t)"See3ing..........................................................................* (e%tricting Attorney"Client Privilege Doe%n<t Increa%e Tr,t) See3ing' Ot)er Privilege%.*& (e%tricting Attorney"Client Privilege Doe%n<t Increa%e Tr,t) See3ing' Alternate Ca,%alitie%..........................................................................................................................** D,e Proce%% Protection% O,t2eig) Any :ar- to Tr,t) See3ing Fro- Attorney"Client Privilege..............................................................................................................................5 Pre%,-ption Again%t Abrogating Privilege........................................................................; @tilitariani%- 9,%ti$ie% Attorney"Client Privilege..............................................................6 Attorney"Client Privilege =ro,nded in @tilitarian and Non"@tilitarian 9,%ti$ication%.......4 Attorney"Client Privilege Aey to 9,%t and /oral Sy%te-.................................................. Attorney"Client Privilege Aey to 9,%tice............................................................................& Attorney"Client Privilege Increa%e% Social Wel$are T)ro,g) I-proved (e%pect $or t)e #a2...................................................................................................................................... Attorney"Client Privilege Aey to Con%tit,tional D,e Proce%% Protection%........................1 Attorney"Client Privilege Aey to Si7t) A-end-ent Protection%......................................14 Attorney"Client Privilege Aey to Fi$t) A-end-ent Protection%......................................16 Attorney"Client Privilege Central Feat,re o$ 9,%tice Sy%te-............................................14 Attorney"Client Privilege Central Feat,re o$ t)e Adver%arial 9,%tice Sy%te-..................1 Attorney"Client Privilege =ro,nded in 0ario,% /oral T)eorie%......................................1* Attorney"Client Privilege Pro-ote% (e%pect $or Individ,al A,tono-y............................1. Attorney"Client Privilege Critical $or Do-e%tic 0iolence 0icti-%.................................45; Attorney"Client Privilege (ecogniBed in /any Co,ntrie%..............................................456 Attorney"Client Privilege Serve% /,ltiple Societal Intere%t%..........................................454
AT' !Attorney"Client Privilege Tr,-p% Ot)er Societal Intere%t%!..................................45 AT' !Privilege Decrea%e% #egiti-acy?P,blic (e%pect $or Co,rt%!..................................45& AT' !Wrong to Separate W)at i% #egal $ro- W)at i% /oral!.........................................45* AT' !Attorney Client Privilege Protect% t)e Po2er$,l!...................................................45. AT' !Attorney% are Agent% o$ t)e Co,rt!........................................................................451 S)o,ld Not E7e-pt E7onerating Evidence Fro- Attorney"Client Privilege..................445 S)o,ld Not Con$or- Attorney"Client to Sa-e Standard% a% Dr.?Patient Con$identiality ..........................................................................................................................................444 Privilege Narro2ly Con%tr,cted' Care$,lly 8alanced.....................................................44; Privilege Narro2ly Con%tr,cted' Prevent Deat) or 8odily :ar-...................................446 Privilege Narro2ly Con%tr,cted' Cri-e"Fra,d E7ception..............................................444 Privilege Narro2ly Con%tr,cted' Et)ical D,ty to Di%clo%e PerC,ry................................44 Privilege Narro2ly Con%tr,cted' Con$ined to Act,al Attorney%.....................................44& Terrori%- An%2er%' P,blic Intere%t in Preventing Terrori%- Tr,-p% Attorney"Client Privilege ..........................................................................................................................44* Ca%e"8y"Ca%e A%%e%%-ent% @nder-ine 8ene$it% $ro- Privilege....................................44. E7ception% to Attorney"Client Privilege Sno2ball..........................................................441 E7ception% to Attorney"Client Privilege @nder-ine E$$ectivene%%................................4;5 Dr.?Patient Con$identiality Spillover' #in3 " (ationale t)e Sa-e...................................4;4 CP " FederaliBe Privilege' Solve% @ncertainty.................................................................4;;
Topic Wording
2013 November/December Topic (e%olved' In t)e @nited State% cri-inal C,%tice %y%te-D tr,t)"%ee3ing o,g)t to ta3e precedence over attorney"client privilege.
**DEFINITIONS**
&
"Attorney-Client Privilege" Legal De inition!

LE"AL DEFINITION OF ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E T)o-a% A. De&etrio' Pa!t Pre!ident C(icago )ar A!!ociation' *+++' !Trial Practice' ObCectionE Attorney"Client Privilege""O) (eallyF!D 44 C8A (ecordD 41D p. 41" 5 =enerally %tatedD t)e attorney"client privilege i% de$ined a%' !co--,nication% -ade by a client to an attorney ,nder t)e $ollo2ing circ,-%tance%' G4H 2)ere legal advice o$ any 3ind i% %o,g)t $ro- an attorney in )i% capacity a% %,c)D G;H t)e co--,nication% relating to t)at p,rpo%eD G6H -ade in con$idence by t)e clientD G4H are at )i% in%i%tence per-anently protected $rodi%clo%,re by t)e client or t)e attorneyD G H ,nle%% t)at protection i% 2aived . CN( Inve%t-ent% Inc. v. T)e 9e$$er%on
Tr,%t and Saving% 8an3 o$ PeoriaD 44 Ill. App. 6d 45*4D 45*4 G6rd Di%t. 41.6H.
Privilege, Legal Protection o Con identiality in Speci ic #elation!(ip!

P#I%ILE"E #EFE#S TO T-E P#OTECTION OF CONFIDENTIALIT$ IN A LE"AL P#OCEEDIN" (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;4 Con$identiality i% a principle o$ legal et)ic% t)at govern% 2)en co--,nication% -ay be di%clo%ed and 2)enD -ore co--onlyD t)ey %)o,ld re-ain con$idential. Privilege""-ore ab%ol,te""protect% again%t co-pelled di%clo%,re in a depo%ition or trial proceeding. !Everyt)ing t)at i% privileged i% al%o protected by t)e con$identiality principle b,t t)e conver%e i% not tr,e.! T)e broader protection o$ con$identiality i% governed by pro$e%%ional r,le% o$ et)ic% and contract,al arrange-ent%I t)e -ore li-ited concept o$ privilege i% governed by %tat,te and t)e co--on la2. P#I%ILE"E ATTAC-ES LE"AL P#OTECTION TO CONFIDENTIAL #ELATIONS-IPS (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ; T)ere i% a $,nda-ental di%tinction bet2een con$identiality generally and privileged co--,nication% %peci$ically. Co--,nication% bet2een partie% -ay be con$identialD and t)at con$identiality -ay and %)o,ld be )onored in -o%t %it,ation%. Privilege goe% one %tep $,rt)erD in%,lating t)e partie% $ro- %anction% $or re$,%ing to te%ti$y in a legal proceeding or prod,ce doc,-ent% re+,e%ted by %,bpoena. In t)e%e in%tance%D t)e rel,ctant party clai-% t)at t)ere i% a greater %ocietal intere%t in pre%erving t)e con$identiality o$ t)eir relation%)ip t)an t)ere i% in revealing t)e re+,e%ted in$or-ation. T)e con%iderationD t)enD i% t)e -orality o$ di%clo%,re in %it,ation% in 2)ic) con$identiality i% %o,g)t
$or good and %ocially %o,nd rea%on%.
Et(ical #e01ire&ent o Attorney Con identiality Di!tinct ro& Evidentiary Privilege

ET-ICAL #2LE #E"A#DIN" ATTO#NE$ CONFIDENTIALIT$ DISTINCT F#O3 AND )#OADE# T-AN T-E E%IDENTIA#$ P#I%ILE"E Pa,l C. "iannelli' La4 Pro e!!or-Ca!e We!tern #e!erve' *++/' @nder%tanding EvidenceD p. .. T)e attorney"client privilege %)o,ld be di%ting,i%)ed $ro- an attorney<% obligation% ,nder t)e r,le% o$ pro$e%%ional re%pon%ibility. /odel (,le 4.&GaH %tate% t)at la2yer% !%)all not reveal in$or-ation relating to repre%entation o$ a
clientD! 2it) only t2o narro2 e7ception%' G4H To prevent a client $roco--itting a cri-inal act li3ely to re%,lt in i--inent deat) or %,b%tantial bodily )ar-D or G;H 2)ere t)ere i% a di%p,te concerning t)e attorney<% cond,ct. T)e con$identiality r,le goe% beyond t)e evidentiary privilege' !T)e r,le o$ client"la2yer con$identiality applie% in %it,ation% ot)er t)an t)o%e 2)ere evidence i% %o,g)t $ro- t)e la2yer t)ro,g) co-p,l%ion o$ la2. T)e con$identiality r,le applie% not -erely to -atter% co--,nicated in con$idence by t)e client b,t al%o to all in$or-ation relating to t)e repre%entationD 2)atever it% %o,rce.! In %)ortD t)e attorney"client privilege i% li-ited to communications, and t)e et)ical r,le cover% all in$or-ation obtained a% a re%,lt o$ t)e repre%entation. /oreoverD an evidentiary privilege applie% only in legal
proceeding%D 2)ile t)e et)ical r,le applie% o,t%ide t)e- a% 2ell. DISTINCTION )ETWEEN P#I%ILE"E AND P#OFESSIONAL ET-ICAL #2LES (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. 64 T)e cla%%ic pro$e%%ional et)ical r,le% t)at apply to la2yer%D doctor%D and prie%t% are parallel to b,t di$$erent $ro- privilege%. Pro$e%%ional% are -onitored by t)eir pro$e%%ional organiBation% . W)at and 2)en t)ey -ay and -ay not div,lge i% governed by bar and -edical and c),rc) r,le%. T)o%e pro$e%%ional r,le% bind pro$e%%ional%D b,t t)ey are not evidentiary r,le% t)at deter-ine 2)at evidence i% and i% not ad-i%%ible in co,rt. T)e r,le% -ay di$$er in t)eir applicationD en$orce-entD and e7tent. P#OFESSIONAL CODE OF ET-ICS )#OADE# T-AN T-E P#I%ILE"E (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &6 T)e principle o$ con$identiality bet2een attorney% and client% )a% t2o %o,rce%""t)e general la2 o$ evidence and t)e r,le% o$ pro$e%%ional et)ic%. T)e evidentiary privilege prevent% attorney% only $rote%ti$ying again%t a clientI t)e pro$e%%ional code o$ et)ic% applie% in all conte7t% and govern% all type% o$ in$or-ation ""
not -erely co--,nication%""$ro- all %o,rce% i$ t)e in$or-ation i% garnered $ro- t)e repre%entation o$ a client.
**AFFI#3ATI%E**
45
Attorney-Client Privilege Con lict! 4it( Tr1t(-See5ing

E%IDENTIA#$ P#I%ILE"E #2LES IN CONFLICT WIT- SEA#C- FO# T-E T#2T/elanie 8. Le!lie' La4 Pro e!!or-)en6a&in Cardo7o Sc(ool o La4' *+++' !T)e Co%t% o$ Con$identiality and t)e P,rpo%e o$ PrivilegeD! ;555 Wi%. #. (ev. 64D p. 64 Con%e+,entlyD t)e content% o$ attorney"client co--,nication% are e7traordinarily relevant and reliable evidence. I$ t)e point o$ litigation i% to ded,ce t)e tr,t)D 2)y e7cl,de attorney"client co--,nication%F /o%t evidentiary r,le% $,rt)er t)e %earc) $or tr,t). :ear%ay i% e7cl,ded a% ,nreliableD c)aracter evidence a% ,nd,ly preC,dicial. T)e la2 o$ privilege% i% a %tar3 e7ception beca,%e it conceal% evidence t)at i% )ig)ly reliable and probative.
We tolerate attorney"client privilege beca,%e 2e %,ppo%e t)at 2it)o,t itD $ear or ignorance 2o,ld ca,%e client% to o-itD %lantD or $al%i$y in$or-ation 2)en con%,lting attorney%. Per)ap% ,n2ittinglyD client% 2o,ld $or$eit t)e opport,nity to obtain %o,nd legal advice. T)e privilegeD t)ere$oreD enable% client% to $,nction e$$ectively in t)e legal %y%te-. T)e price i% t)e e7cl,%ion o$
relevant and reliable evidence. ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E IN-I)ITS T-E T#2T--SEE8IN" F2NCTION, DISTINCT F#O3 OT-E# E%IDENTIA#$ #2LES T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. &* T)e protection a$$orded by t)e attorney"client privilege and ot)er ,n+,ali$ied evidentiary privilege% i% di%ting,i%)able $ro- t)e protection% a$$orded by ot)er evidence r,le% t)at operate to e7cl,de " e.g.D )ear%ayD opinion evidenceD and c)aracter evidence re%triction% " in t2o re%pect%. Fir%tD privilege% not only prevent t)e ,%e o$ protected co--,nication% at trial b,t al%o pro)ibit adver%e partie% $ro- gaining acce%% to %,c) co--,nication%D even i$ t)ey contain ot)er2i%e relevant in$or-ation. Privilege% protect co--,nication% by bot) partie% and non"partie% $rodi%covery and ot)er $or-% o$ co-p,l%ory di%clo%,re. T),%D ,nli3e ot)er
legal doctrine% cla%%i$ied a% evidentiary r,le%D privilege% protect again%t di%covery o$ relevant in$or-ation. O$ co,r%eD t)e attorney" client privilege doe% not protect ,nderlying $act% or in$or-ationD 2)ic) can be di%covered t)ro,g) -ean% ot)er t)an di%clo%,re o$ t)e attorney"client co--,nication. SecondD t)e te%ti-onial privilege%D incl,ding t)e attorney"client privilegeD are ,nli3e ot)er e7cl,%ionary r,le%
beca,%e t)ey are not de%igned to a%%i%t in $inding t)e tr,t) by e7cl,ding evidence 2)ic) i% ,nreliable or li3ely to be ,n$airly preC,dicial or -i%leading. To t)e contraryD privilege% )ave t)e e$$ect o$ in)ibitingD rat)er t)an $acilitatingD t)e ill,-ination o$ t)e tr,t). Privilege% %erve to protect ot)er intere%t% t)at are regarded a% %,$$iciently
i-portant to 2arrant li-iting acce%% to relevant evidence.
P#I%ILE"E 2NDO2)TEDL$ 2NDE#3INES T#2T--SEE8IN" T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. *4";
JetD given t)e privilege<% potential %ocial co%t%D even ardent %,pporter% o$ t)e ,tilitarian rationale " incl,ding t)e S,pre-e Co,rt " advocate con%tr,ing t)e privilege narro2ly. Doctrinal li-itation%D %,c) a% t)e cri-e"$ra,d e7ceptionD 2)ic) %ee3 to addre%% ab,%e o$ t)e privilegeD are de%igned to red,ce potential %ocial )ar-. De%pite %,c) li-itation%D beca,%e t)e privilege in)ibit% di%covery o$ relevant co--,nication%D it can create ob%tacle% to a%certaining t)e tr,t). T)e %igni$icance o$ t)i% adver%e con%e+,ence i% indeter-inate beca,%e t)e privilege protect% only attorney"client co--,nication% t)at arg,ably 2o,ld not ot)er2i%e e7i%t and doe% not %)ield ,nderlying in$or-ation or $act% $rodi%covery. StillD t)e privilege ,n+,e%tionably i-po%e%
barrier% to con$rontation and a%certaining $act% by %)ielding attorney% $rote%ti$ying and ot)er2i%e di%clo%ing relevant co--,nication% andD at ti-e%D %)ielding client% $ro- $,ll e7a-ination . IndeedD t)e %)eer vol,-e o$ litigation over privilege i%%,e% %trongly %,gge%t% t)at adver%e partie% vie2 acce%% to t)e%e co--,nication% a% bot) ,%e$,l and i-portant. ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E E9P#ESSL$ T-WA#TS T#2T--SEE8IN" #OLE -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' I. Introd,ction' T)e Develop-ent o$ Evidentiary Privilege% in A-erican #a2D! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 44 4 Attac3ed a% i-pedi-ent% to t)e %earc) $or tr,t)D prai%ed a% g,arantor% o$ individ,al privacyD evidentiary privilege% )ave long been a %,bCect o$ controver%y 2it)in A-erican la2. T)at t)i% i% %o i% )ardly %,rpri%ing. @nli3e ot)er r,le% o$ evidenceD privilege% are not $a%)ioned pri-arily to e7cl,de ,nreliable evidence or ot)er2i%e to aid in t)e tr,t)" %ee3ing $,nction. IndeedD a% deviation% $ro- t)e cent,rie%"old co--on la2 principle t)at !t)e p,blic )a% a rig)t to every -an<% evidenceD! privilege% e7pre%%ly %,bordinate t)e goal o$ tr,t) %ee3ing to ot)er %ocietal
44
intere%t%. Privilege% t),% vi%ibly i-pede t)e realiBation o$ a central obCective o$ t)e legal %y%te- in order to advance ot)erD o$ten le%% i--ediateD goal%. CONFIDENTIALIT$ #2LES NECESSA#IL$ INTE#FE#E WIT- T#2T--SEE8IN" (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;."1 A% rea%onable a% r,le% abo,t con$identiality and privileged co--,nication% areD t)ey nonet)ele%% rai%e a dile--a. All con$identiality i% +,e%tionable i$ t)e overriding goal i% to get to t)e tr,t) in an adver%arial %y%te-. For t)i% rea%onD t)e noted 8riti%) ,tilitarian p)ilo%op)er 9ere-y 8ent)a- arg,ed t)at -o%t privileged co--,nication% 2ere !r,bbi%)!I in )i% opinionD only rational in+,iry relatively $ree o$ e7cl,%ionary r,le% co,ld en%,re !rectit,de o$ deci%ion.! E7cl,%ion% lac3ed e-pirical veri$icationD %)ielded anti%ocial cond,ctD and prod,ced -i%c)ie$ by allo2ing g,ilty people to e%cape p,ni%)-ent D )e t)eoriBed. !E7cl,de evidenceD yo, e7cl,de C,%ticeD! )e ca,tioned. So,nding very -,c) li3e -odern con%ervative critic% o$ t)e clai-ed !ga-e%-an%)ip! o$ t)e A-erican cri-inal C,%tice %y%te-D 8ent)a- arg,ed t)at innocent client% %)o,ld be 2illing to )ave t)eir attorney% te%ti$yI only t)e g,ilty one% 2o,ld 2ant to in%i%t on con$identiality "" b,t $or anti%ocial rea%on%. Si-ilarlyD o$$ering %po,%e% con$identiality per-it% !%c)e-e% o$ inC,%tice! bet2een -arried co,ple%D -a3ing t)e- acco-plice% in cri-e. 8ent)a- did t)in3 t)at g,aranteed con$identiality 2a% re+,ired in t2o in%tance%' in con$e%%ional%
2it) prie%t% and to protect %tate %ecret%.!
Protecting con$identiality i% incon%i%tent 2it) getting at t)e tr,t)D t)e $,nda-ental p,rpo%e o$ t)e trial %y%te- and t)e r,le% o$ evidenceI it precl,de% critical evidence. And a% a practical -atterD t)ere i% no 2ay to prove de$initively t)at relation%)ip% 2o,ld be c)illed or 2o,ld not e7i%t i$ t)e partie% to t)e- 2ere not g,aranteed con$identiality. Wo,ldn<t %ic3 people %till ,%e t)eir doctor% even i$ t)ere 2a% no a%%,rance o$ con$identialityF To 2)at e7tent %)o,ld t)e la2 endor%e ),-ani%tic concern% ,nderlying con$identialityF I$ g,ilty cri-inal% lo%e per%onal %,ccor and p%yc)ic relie$ by lo%ing t)e con$identiality o$ t)eir con$e%%ion%""%ayD to t)eir p%yc)iatri%t or %ocial 2or3er or prie%t"" %)o,ld 2e careF T)e%e +,e%tion% and ot)er% are di%c,%%ed in t)e c)apter% dealing 2it) t)e %peci$ic privileged co--,nication%
pre%ently recogniBed by t)e la2.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E T-E ONL$ ONE W-E#E CO2#TS DON=T 3A8E E9CEPTIONS FO# T-E T#2T(onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. .6"4
I% t)e protection o$ attorney"client co--,nication% a -odern $or- o$ pro$e%%ional protectioni%- to2ard 2)ic) co,rt% are e%pecially %olicito,%F :i%toricallyD t)i% privilege )a% bene$ited $ro- C,dicial de$erence and ,nder%tanding. A% one co,rt reportedD !It i% o,t o$ regard...to t)e ad-ini%tration o$ C,%ticeD 2)ic) cannot go on 2it)o,t )e aid o$ -en %3illed in C,ri%pr,denceD in t)e practice o$ t)e co,rt%D and in t)o%e -atter% a$$ecting rig)t% and obligation% 2)ic) $or- t)e %,bCect o$ all C,dicial proceeding%. I$ t)e
privilege did not e7i%t at allD every one 2o,ld be t)ro2n ,pon )i% o2n legal re%o,rce%. Deprived o$ all pro$e%%ional a%%i%tanceD a -an 2o,ld not vent,re to con%,lt ay %3ill$,l per%onD or 2o,ld only dare to tell )i% co,n%elor )al$ )i% ca%e.! Jet in all ot)er in%tance%D co,rt% )ave been a-enable to e7ception% to relational privilege% beca,%e t)ey are i-pedi-ent% to la2 en$orce-ent and t)e %earc) $or tr,t). P#I%ILE"E P#OTECTS T-E 3OST #ELIA)LE E%IDENCE (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;;4" T)e %earc)"$or"tr,t) pre-i%e o$ trial% lead% to t)e concl,%ion t)at no privilege %)o,ld be per-ittedD beca,%e in t)at %earc) t)e be%t evidence -ay co-e $ro- t)o%e very co--,nication% t)at )i%torically )ave been privileged. 0ario,% $or-% o$ te%ti-ony -ay provide piece% o$ any tr,e pict,re. Co--,nication% by people in con$e%%ion or ,nder p%yc)oanaly%i% or in conver%ation 2it) t)eir %po,%e% or attorney% are li3ely to be t)e be%t and -o%t relevant evidence in any civil or cri-inal trial. Pro$e%%ion% p,t people at peace %o t)at t)ey -ay reveal t)eir tr,t)%D and t)ey are -ore li3ely to do %o t)an are co-peting attorney% in t)e )o%tile adver%arial %y%te-. Jet t)at i% t)e very privileged evidence t)at t)e la2 e7cl,de%. >2STICE S$STE3 P2TS P#I%ILE"E A)O%E T#2T8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. ; :o2everD legal pro$e%%ional privilege operate% ,nli3e any ot)er type o$ con$idence D oral or doc,-entaryD on t)e gro,nd% o$ con$identiality. It )a% been %aid t)at !no obligation o$ )onorD no d,tie% o$ non"di%clo%,re ari%ing $ro- t)e nat,re o$ a p,r%,it or callingD co,ld %tand in t)e 2ay o$ t)e i-perative nece%%ity o$ rvealing t)e tr,t) in t)e 2itne%%
4;
bo7.! #egal pro$e%%ional privilege i% an e7ception to t)i% general principleD developed $or rea%on% o$ $,nda-ental p,blic policy b,t 2)ic) i% nonet)ele%% ano-alo,%. A% a 0ictorian 0ice"C)ancellor p,t it in de$ending t)e rationale o$ legal pro$e%%ional privilegeD even tr,t) !li3e all ot)er good t)ing%D -ay be love ,n2i%ely""-aybe be p,r%,ed too 3eenly"" -ay co%t too -,c).! #egal pro$e%%ional privilege entitle% a party not to di%clo%e in$or-ation even i$ $or e7a-pleD it i% )ig)ly relevant to i%%,e% to be deter-ined in a co,rt or ad-ini%trative trib,nal . In e%%enceD privileged
co--,nication% are i--,ne $roco-p,l%ory di%clo%,re.
46
Attorney-Client Privilege Con lict! 4it( Tr1t(-See5ingAdver!arial Sy!te& Con lict! Wit( Tr1t(
AD%E#SA#IAL NAT2#E OF S$STE3 ENS2#ES 3AN$ O2TCO3ES T-AT DO NOT CO3PO#T WIT- T-E T#2TT)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. ;5"4 In every legal action t)ere i% going to be a 2inner and a lo%er. T)at<% )o2 t)e co-bativeD adver%arial %y%tei% %et ,p to 2or3. And -a3e no -i%ta3e abo,t it' t)e %y%te- i% adver%arial. Even 2it) corporate -erger% and ac+,i%ition%D ta3eover% are ,%,ally dee-ed )o%tile. T)e advocacy i% %,ppo%ed to be Bealo,%D 2)ic) only )eig)ten% t)e 2inner"ta3e"all di-en%ion% o$ t)e con$lict. T2o partie% pre%ent t)eir ca%e%D trying to %2ayD i$ not -anip,lateD t)e %tory in t)eir directionD even a% t)eir ver%ion% -ay %tray $ro- t)e act,al tr,t). Co,rt% are de%igned to $acilitate t)e re%ol,tion o$ t)e%e con$lict%D
to e%%entially pic3 t)e 2inner%D o$$iciating t)i% Bero"%,- e7c)ange bet2een partie% 2)o %o-e)o2D t)ro,g) li$e and it% varied tran%action% and -i%)ap%D 2o,ld ,p a% adver%arie%D or 2or%eD ene-ie%. 8,t in a p,re 2inner"ta3e"all paradig-D 2)ere t)e advocacy i% al2ay% $ierce and %trategically played o,tD victory i% not %ynony-o,% 2it) C,%ticeD beca,%e t)e rig)t party""t)e party t)at 2a% rig)t and %)o,ld )ave 2on""-ay not end ,p victorio,%. So-eti-e% t)e o,tco-e o$ a legal con$lict i% deter-ined $or rea%on% 2)olly apart $ro- t)e tr,t) or $ro- 2)at t)e -orally correct re%,lt %)o,ld )ave been. O$ten it<% a -atter o$ one %ide )aving %,perior re%o,rce% over and t)e ot)er and e7ploiting t)e- -ercile%%ly. One la2yer ""or a tea- o$ la2yer%"-ig)t be %i-ply -ore %3illed t)an )i% adver%ary. So-eti-e% t)e govern-ent<% pro%ec,torial po2er i% in%,r-o,ntableD or t)e political pa%%ion% t)at e7i%t o,t%ide t)e co,rt)o,%e -a3e it i-po%%ible $or t)e de$endant to receive a $air trial. In %o-e ca%e%D t)e pre%,-ption% go in t)e oppo%ite directionD 2)ere t)e co--,nity""in t)e $or- o$ a repre%entative C,ry""%end% a -e%%age by allo2ing a g,ilty per%on to go $ree. T)en t)ere are t)o%e occa%ion% 2)en tec)nicalD proced,ralD or con%tit,tional irreg,laritie% dictate a re%,lt t)at i% -orally 2rongD b,t one t)at C,%tice %o-e)o2 de-and% . S,c) an in%tance occ,r% 2)en t)e police -i%)andle or obtain evidence ,nla2$,lly. :ad it not been $or a proced,ral errorD t)e de$endant 2o,ld )ave been $o,nd g,ilty.
E3P-ASIS ON BEALO2S AD%OCAC$ IN AN AD%E#SA#IAL S$STE3 2NDE#3INES T#2T- SEE8IN" T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 465
T)i% %ati%$ie% t)e 2inner"ta3e"all di-en%ion% o$ t)e legal %y%te- +,ite 2ell. #a2%,it% are al2ay% $ra-ed a% one party ver%,% t)e ot)er. Once t)e la2%,it co--ence%""even be$ore t)en""intere%t% are a,to-atically dee-ed adver%eD )o%tileD and colliding. And in a
conte%t in 2)ic) one %ide i% al2ay% pitted again%t t)e ot)erD t)ere are no e7ternalD e7ten,ating con%ideration%""no co--on or p,blic val,e%.! All t)at -atter% i% %ec,ring an ,lti-ate victory""regardle%% o$ tr,t)D regardle%% o$ )onorD regardle%% o$ 2)at<% rig)t. And it i% t)e Bealo,% advocateD %)arp teet) glea-ingD no%tril% $laringD an inte-perate do%age o$ Beal in evident di%playD 2)o i% %ing,larly capable o$ 2inning t)e conte%t% t)at t)e legal %y%te- in%tigate%. Fro- a -oral per%pectiveD it i% not t)e advocacyD or t)e repre%entationD t)at i% t)e proble-. It<% t)e partic,larly loadedD elevated no,n t)at precede% it""Bealotry. >ealo,%ne%% i% in%atiable in it% pa%%ion $or victory and vindication. >ealotry 2ill %top at not)ing to 2in. >ealotry )a% a 2ay o$ tra-pling over any re%pect $or t)e tr,t). BEALO2S AD%OCAC$ DISTO#TS AND I"NO#ES T-E T#2TT)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 465"4 So -,c) o$ 2)at pa%%e% $or Bealo,% advocacy in t)e la2 i% all abo,t $,dgingD %pinningD and e7plaining a2ay t)e ,n$lattering ele-ent% o$ a client<% %tory. And in t)e 2or%t ca%e%D t)e la2yer engage% in o,trig)t lying. Tr,t) i% be%ide t)e pointD ac)ieving t)e rig)t -oral o,tco-e even -ore %o. T)e Bealo,% advocate 2ant% to 3no2 2)at act,ally )appenedD b,t doe%n<t 2ant t)e re%t o$ ,% to 3no2. Tr,t) i% i-portant only a% a 2ay to -aintain da-age control. Tr,t)D it %ee-%D i% t)e be%t 2eapon $or 2aging a pree-ptive %tri3e. T)e Bealo,% attorney i% not intere%ted in tr,t) per %eD C,%t in it% e7ploitation. W)ile a client i% %pea3ingD t)e attorney i% conte-plating t)e be%t lig)t in 2)ic) to c)aracteriBe t)e %tory. And t)at lig)t i% a $al%e lig)t. It i%n<t bea-ed in order to ill,-inate t)e tr,t)D b,t rat)er to blind and di%tort it. BEALO2S #EP#ESENTATION DI#ECTL$ ASSA2LTS T#2T- SEE8IN"
44
T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 464 In t)e la2D Bealotry lead% to lie%. One %tory i% a% good a% any ot)erI eac) e7pendableD ea%ily ,nreliable. In t)e -ind o$ a BealotD tr,t) i% al2ay% %,bCect to -anip,lation. Find one tr,t)D a%%ert it pa%%ionatelyD and ignore t)e re%t. T)e $,BBier t)e %toryD t)e better. :one%ty i% corr,pted by ga-e%-an%)ip. T)e attorney -ay be t)e -o,t)piece and %toryteller o$ )i% client. 8,t Bealo,% repre%entation give% licen%e to t)e telling o$ entirely $ictional D b,t legally -ore palatableD tale%. T)ro2 ,p a% -any po%%ibilitie% a% t)e -ind can i-agineD and t)en let t)e C,ry tr,dge t)ro,g) t)e a%%e-bled con$,%ion. Attorney% 2ill o$ten do 2)atever i% nece%%ary to clai- victoryD incl,ding not li%tening to t)e 2i%)e% o$ t)eir client%D or $abricating ne2 tr,t)% to replace act,al one% t)at preC,dice t)e client<% ca%e. Pro%ec,tor% in t)e cri-inal area Bealo,%ly $oc,% on conviction rate% and Cail ti-e beca,%e it a2ard% t)e- an ,lti-ate
victory. >ealo,%ne%% lead% %o-e pro%ec,tor% to 2it))old evidenceD -i%lead 2itne%%e%D or c,t deal% 2it) dangero,% cri-inal% in e7c)ange $or t)eir te%ti-ony. (e-edie% t)at are -oral and %pirit,al in nat,reD )o2everD can be acco-pli%)ed 2it)o,t )aving to re%ort -,c) to Beal. 8,t t)e ab%ence o$ Beal %o-e)o2 al%o -a3e% t)e- le%% intere%ting.
T)e Bero"%,- nat,re o$ t)e legal %y%te-D co-bined 2it) t)e ,niver%al adoption o$ Bealotry a% t)e -arc)ing order% o$ practitioner% and pro%ec,tor%D tran%$or-% t)e -oral -i%%ion o$ t)e legal %y%te- $ro- one o$ tr,t)" %ee3ingD %torytellingD and C,%ticeD to one o$ $abricationD di%tortionD and -anip,lation in p,r%,it o$ victory.
T)e%e victorie%D )o2everD -a3e ,% all t)e lo%er%.
BEALO2S AD%OCAC$ SANCTIONS ATTO#NE$ P#ACTICES TO DELI)E#ATEL$ F#2ST#ATE T#2T- SEE8IN" T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 464"; A la2yer %)o,ld advocate $or )i% or )er client $ait)$,llyD %)o,ld %ee3 o,t t)e be%t re%,ltD and $,nction a% t)e client<% repre%entative be$ore t)e la2. 8,t legal repre%entation %)o,ld not operate at t)e e7pen%e o$ tr,t)D and never to t)e e7tent t)at t)e la2yer )a% actively participated in a -i%carriage o$ C,%tice""cond,cting )i-%el$ in a 2ay t)at violate% t)e -oral %tandard% o$ t)e co--,nity. In Nix v. WhitesideD t)e S,pre-e Co,rt r,led t)at la2yer% cannot !advocate or pa%%ively tolerate a client<% giving $al%e te%ti-ony. ! In a la2 revie2 articleD Jale la2 pro$e%%or A3)il (eed A-ar %pec,lated 2)et)er Nix %)o,ld be applied to %it,ation% not only 2)en attorney% p,t on perC,red te%ti-onyD b,t al%o 2)ereD t)ro,g) cro%%"e7a-inationD t)ey )ara%% or deceive 2itne%%e% 2)o t)ey 3no2 to be telling t)e tr,t). In t)e na-e o$ Bealotry and bra%) advocacyD )o2 -,c) con$rontation doe% t)e con$rontation cla,%e o$ t)e &t) A-end-ent act,ally per-itF Pro$e%%or A-ar al%o pondered 2)y it i% proper $or attorney% to %pin $al%e t)eorie% and $act% d,ring t)eir opening %tate-ent%D 3no2ing t)at it% only p,rpo%e i% to di%tract C,ror%D t)ro2ing t)e- o$$ t)e %cent $or t)e tr,t). AD%E#SA#$ S$STE3 )#IN"S 3O#ALIT$ INTO ?2ESTION (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. *; #egal t)eori%t% )ave debated t)e dile--a created by t)i% ca%eD and t)ere i% no totally acceptable an%2er. One e7pert even +,e%tioned 2)et)er a decent et)ical per%on can ever be a la2yer . T)e la2 elevate%D a% it -,%tD t)e adver%ary %y%te-D t)e pre%,-ption o$ innocenceD t)e rig)t to co,n%elD and r,le% o$ con$identiality. I% t)i% a %eparate -oralityF I$ %oD -ig)t t)ere be e7ception%F W)o %tri3e% a balance bet2een co--on -orality and pro$e%%ional or legal -oralityD and by 2)at %tandard%F
Attorney-Client Privilege Con lict! 4it( Tr1t(-See5ing, Only Needed or Lie! and Fal!e De en!e
ATTO#NE$ CLIENT P#I%ILE"E ONL$ NEEDED TO P#OTECT LIES AND FALSE DEFENSES (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &4 8ent)a-D along 2it) %o-e early co--on"la2 C,dge%D co-plained abo,t t)e i--oral i-pact o$ t)e r,le o$ privileged co--,nication%D in -,c) t)e %a-e lang,age a% -odern con%ervative% 2)o c)ide t)e cri-inal"C,%tice %y%te- $or being a ga-e o$ c)ance -ore t)an a %earc) $or tr,t). I$ t)e g,ilty client i% deterred $ro- %ee3ing legal advice Ga $al%e de$en%eHD t)e arg,-ent goe%D t)ere i% no )ar- to C,%ticeI t)e innocent client )a% not)ing to $earD %o 2on<t be deterred.
4&
Attorney-Client Privilege Con lict! 4it( Tr1t(-See5ingCon lict! 4it( Attorney a! O icer o t(e Co1rt
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E CONFLICTS WIT- ATTO#NE$ AS OFFICE# OF T-E CO2#T 9ocelyn N .Sand! @ (oy Conn' La4 St1dent! :/;A' !Con$identiality and t)e #a2yer<% Con$licting D,tyD! ;* :o2. #.9. 6;1D p. 6;1 T)i% article di%c,%%e% t)e obligation o$ t)e la2yer to pre%erve t)e con$idence% o$ )i% client a% it con$lict% 2it) t)e la2yer<% d,ty o$ candor a% an o$$icer o$ t)e co,rt. A% an integral part o$ o,r C,dicial %y%te-D t)e la2yer i% c)arged 2it) t)e re%pon%ibility o$ ,p)olding t)e la2. T)e la2yer -,%t advi%e )i% client to avoid violation% o$
t)e la2 %o t)at t)e client -ay properly e7erci%e )i% rig)t%.
4*
Attorney-Client Privilege Con lict! 4it( Tr1t(-See5ing- AT, "Evidence Wo1ld Not ECi!t Wit(o1t t(e Privilege"
P#I%ILE"E NOT LI3ITED TO E%IDENCE T-AT OT-E#WISE WO2LD NOT -A%E )EEN DISCO%E#A)LE /elanie 8. Le!lie' La4 Pro e!!or-)en6a&in Cardo7o Sc(ool o La4' *+++' !T)e Co%t% o$ Con$identiality and t)e P,rpo%e o$ PrivilegeD! ;555 Wi%. #. (ev. 64D p. 64"; In a per$ect 2orldD )o2everD t)e privilege 2o,ld %)ield no evidence. Privilege generate% t)e co--,nication t)at t)e privilege protect%. Eli-inate t)e privilegeD and t)e co--,nication di%appear% or i% rendered ,nreliable.
In a per$ect 2orldD t)enD t)e privilege 2o,ld protect only reliable %tate-ent% t)at 2o,ld not ot)er2i%e )ave been -ade. In realityD )o2everD t)e privilege i% not a b,t"$or ca,%e o$ all attorney"client co--,nication%. Client% -ay gain privilege protection
$or %tate-ent% t)at t)ey 2o,ld )ave -ade 2it)o,t t)e privilegeD %i-ply by -inding t)e privilege r,le%. To t)e e7tent t)at client% clai- t)e privilege ,nnece%%arilyD t)e privilege ob%tr,ct% t)e $act"$inding proce%%. It e7cl,de% co--,nication% t)at 2o,ld ot)er2i%e )ave been di%coverable. T),% )ave co,rt% and co--entator%
cea%ele%%lyD al-o%t %tridentlyD e-p)a%iBed t)e i-portance o$ con%tr,ing t)e privilege narro2ly.
P#I%ILE"E DOES E9CL2DE INFO#3ATION T-AT WO2LD -A%E OT-E#WISE E9ISTED - INST#23ENTAL >2STIFICATION FLAWED Ed2ard 9. I&4in5elried' La4 Pro e!!or-2D Cal Davi!' *++*' !T)e :i%torical Cycle in t)e #a2 o$ Evidentiary Privilege%D! Ar3. #. (ev. ;44D p. ; 4"& One i% t)at Wig-ore overe%ti-ated t)e i-pact o$ evidentiary privilege% on layper%on%< o,t"o$"co,rt be)avior. I$ it 2ere tr,e t)at t)e typical client or patient 2o,ld not con%,lt or co--,nicate 2it) pro$e%%ional con$idant% b,t $or t)e e7i%tence o$ evidentiary privilege%D t)e recognition o$ privilege% 2o,ld be co%t"$ree to t)e legal %y%te-. 8,t $or t)e privilegeD t)e layper%on 2o,ld not -a3e t)e di%clo%,re to begin 2it). T),%D t)e privilege 2o,ld
operate to %,ppre%% only potential evidence t)at 2o,ld not )ave co-e into e7i%tence 2it)o,t t)e privilege. Wig-ore<% )ypot)e%i% t)at layper%on% are %o concerned abo,t laterD co-pelled C,dicial di%clo%,re o$ t)eir con$idence% i% pla,%ible. :o2everD -odern %cience )a% ta,g)t ,% to di%ting,i%) bet2een t)e pla,%ible and t)e proven. W)en Wig-ore 2roteD )e did not )ave t)e bene$it o$ any %y%te-aticD e-pirical %t,die% o$ t)e i-pact o$ evidentiary privilege% on t)e o,t"o$"co,rt cond,ct o$ layper%on%. :e )ad no c)oice b,t to rely on co--on %en%e and %tereotypical rea%oning. :o2everD %ince t)e relea%e o$ t)e la%t revi%ion o$ vol,-e eig)t o$ Wig-ore<% treati%eD t)ere )ave been a n,-ber o$ %t,die% on t)e e$$ect o$ t)e attorney"client and p%yc)ot)erapi%t"patient privilege% . It i% certainly dangero,% to e7trapolate $ro- t)e available dataD beca,%e t)ere )ave been only a $e2 )and$,l% o$ %t,die%. :o2everD t)e $inding% in t)e %t,die% are relatively ,ni$or-. T)e re%earc)er% )ave
$airly con%i%tently $o,nd t)at' Even ab%ent a privilegeD only a %-all -inority o$ layper%on% 2o,ld be deterred $rocon%,lting t)e pro$e%%ionalI 2it)o,t a privilegeD per)ap% a %igni$icant -inority o$ t)e layper%on% 2o,ld be %o-e2)at -ore g,arded in t)eir co--,nication%D partic,larly 2ritten co--,nication%D 2it) t)e con$idantI b,t t)e va%t -aCority o$ layper%on% 2o,ld %till con%,lt and co--,nicate 2it) t)eir con$idant% to ro,g)ly t)e %a-e e7tent. On re$lectionD t)e%e $inding% %)o,ld not co-e a% a %,rpri%e. A% Pro$e%%or Pa%c)al pointed o,t in t)e Senate )earing% on t)e propo%ed Federal (,le% o$ EvidenceD -o%t layper%on% co--,nicating 2it) con$idant% are engaged in pri-aryD pre"litigation activitie%. TypicallyD at t)e ti-e o$ t)e co--,nication t)ey )ave little or no concern abo,t %,b%e+,ent litigation. /oreoverD t)ey o$ten )ave %trongD even i-pellingD rea%on% to co--,nicate. For e7a-pleD i$ a patient i% in inten%e pain or $ear% t)at )e or %)e i% dyingD t)e patient i% li3ely to di%clo%e any
in$or-ation re+,e%ted by t)e p)y%ician regardle%% o$ t)e e7i%tence vel non o$ a -edical privilege in t)at C,ri%diction.
4.
AT, "Tr1t( See5ing Fr1!trated )y Ot(er Protection! and Privilege!"

T#2T--I3PAI#IN" P#OTECTIONS A#E CONST#2ED %E#$ NA##OWL$ To- Stacy' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity o 8an!a!' ://:' !T)e Searc) $or Tr,t) in Con%tit,tional Cri-inal Proceeding%D! 14 Col,-. #. (ev. 46&1D p. 46.4
T)e $oregoing di%c,%%ion i% not intended a% a $,lly co-pre)en%ive revie2 o$ t)e Co,rt<% treat-ent o$ tr,t)"i-pairing rig)t% d,ring t)e la%t t2enty year%. It in%tead %ee3% to call attention to an i-portant b,t in%,$$iciently e7a-ined t)e-e' t)e notion t)at t)e %ocietal intere%t in acc,rate adC,dication C,%ti$ie% interpreting tr,t)"i-pairing rig)t% re%trictivel y. T)i% t)e-eD t)o,g) not all"enco-pa%%ingD )a% been perva%ive. It r,n% t)ro,g) %core% o$ deci%ion%D ,ni$ying doctrinal develop-ent%
involving %earc) and %eiB,re la2D t)e privilege again%t %el$"incri-inationD do,ble CeopardyD )ar-le%% errorD and )abea% corp,%.
41
Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, %ital or >1!t O1tco&e!

SAC#IFICIN" T#2T- FO# EFFICIENT DISPOSAL OF CASES 2N>2ST T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. ;4"; I$ t)e co--,nity believe% t)at t)e legal %y%te- i% t)ere to do 2)at<% C,%t and to di%cover t)e tr,t) ""indeedD to provide an o$$icial record o$ t)e tr,t)""t)en a %porting t)eory o$ C,%ticeD 2)ere one %ide i% anointed t)e 2inner 2)ile t)e ot)er i% bani%)ed a% t)e lo%erD -ay not ac)ieve a legiti-ate %en%e o$ C,%tne%%D or tr,t) . WinningD a$ter allD i% a conte%t o$ %3ill and l,c3D %tory"%pinning and -anip,lation%D and not a re$erend,- on tr,t) . 9,%ticeD a% de$ined by a legal re%ol,tionD -ay be doneD b,t %o-eti-e% not at all %ervedD beca,%e t)e re%,lt i% a gr,e%o-e -i%carriage and not C,%t at all. T)e 2inner"ta3e"all %tr,ct,re o$ t)e legal %y%te- i% -orally de$icient beca,%e it create% a pre%,-ption t)at C,%tice )a% been ac)ieved 2)en -orally it )a% not. So-eti-e% t)e ,lti-ate 2inner
%)o,ld not )ave been victorio,%D and t)e lo%ing partyD nonparty victi-%D and t)e o,t%ide co--,nity 3no2 t)i% to be tr,e. And o$ten
t)e be%t -oral re%,lt 2o,ld %ee3 not to tro,nce t)e lo%er b,t to appro7i-ate %o-e -ea%,re o$ victory in bot) partie%""to %end t)e- bot) )o-e )ealed rat)er t)an a-bivalent or enraged. Everyone i% -ade 2or%e o$$ by ,nC,%t o,tco-e%. And t)e di%covery o$ t)e tr,t) )a% to be given t)e %a-e pro-inence a% t)e botto-" lineD e$$icient di%po%al o$ ca%e%. >2STICE S$STE3 S-O2LD P#IO#ITIBE T-E SEA#C- FO# T#2TT)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. .*". Wit) t)i% e%%entially i--oralD albeit per$ectly legal arrange-entD 2e )ave %,rro,nded o,r%elve% 2it) lie%D and loc3ed o,r%elve% ,p 2it)in a %y%te- t)at perpet,ate% $,rt)er lie%. O,r Cail% are $illed 2it) people 2)o are incarcerated $or all t)e 2rong rea%on%D a -ia%-ic )aBe o$ generaliBed g,ilt"" ,n%peci$ied and totally di%connected $ro- t)e act,al event% t)e-%elve%. T)ey %it in CailD and t)e %tory o$ 2)at )appened %it% 2it) t)e-. And no one %ee-% to careD a% long a% Cail% )ave lo2 vacancy rate%. We )ave bargained a2ay t)e %anctity o$ tr,t) $or t)e certainty o$ a Cail %entence. IndeedD t)e o$$icial co,rt)o,%e record% o$ cri-inal di%po%ition% are di%tortedD beca,%e t)ey re$lect $al%e p,ni%)-ent%. A rape i% red,ced to an a%%a,lt. So-et)ing t)at i% $elonio,% %,ddenlyD -agicallyD beco-e% -erely -i%c)ievo,%. A $ir%t"degree o$$en%e i% le%%ened to a cri-e 2it) a lo2er degree o$ c,lpabilityD %tripped do2n to %o-et)ing le%% o-ino,%""and le%% tr,e. We are all ,lti-ately t)e ,n2itting victi-% o$ a %y%te- t)at %,bordinate% tr,t)% to it% narro2 vi%ion o$ C,%tice. 8,t i%n<t C,%tice all abo,t di%covering t)e tr,t)F /oral and )i%torical C,%tice can<t be acco-pli%)ed 2it)o,t 3no2ing 2)at )appened. T)i% i% 2)at people a%%,-e co,rt)o,%e% are $or' tr,t)"tellingD tr,t)"%ee3ingD C,%tice e-bodied in t)e very nat,reD and in all t)e delicate n,ance%D o$ tr,t) it%el$. >2STICE )ETTE# SE#%ED )$ P2#S2IN" T#2T- T-AN P#OTECTIN" P#I%ILE"ES (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. & To accept t)e notion o$ privilegeD one -,%t %,b%cribe to t)e idea t)at t)ere i% a greater good to be attained by en%,ring t)e inviolability o$ conver%ation% bet2een attorney% and t)eir client%. So-e a%3 2)et)er a greater n,-ber o$ people in %ociety 2o,ld be better %erved 2)en t)e goal o$ t)e C,%tice %y%te- i% tr,t) rat)er t)an t)e protection o$ one client<% %el$"protectingD %el$"%erving intere%tD 2)ic) -ay or -ay not lead to t)e tr,t). >2STICE S$STE3 DESI"NED TO SEA#C- FO# T#2T(onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;; A trial p,rport% to be a %earc) $or t)e revelation o$ %ecret%. Witne%%e% are a%3ed to %2ear to tell t)e 2)ole tr,t). Di%covery i% ai-ed at di%clo%ing $act%D revealing conceal-ent%. 9,dge% and C,rie% are c)arged 2it) di%cerning and ,ncovering $act%D )o2ever pain$,l t)e revelation% o$ t)o%e $act% -ay be to rel,ctant 2itne%%e%. It i% dee-ed conte-pt,o,% o$ t)e C,dicial proce%% to re$,%e to te%ti$y. P2#S2IT OF T#2T- 3AIN P2#POSE OF >2STICE S$STE3 8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. 45"4
Wit) regard to t)e need $or cando,rD it i% )ard to $ind a better C,dicial %tate-ent o$ t)e principle t)an t)at o$ Sir 9a-e% Anig)t 8r,ce 0"C in t)e early 0ictorian ca%e o$ Pease v Pease.

!T)e
;5
di%covery and vindication and e%tabli%)-ent o$ tr,t) are -ain p,rpo%e% certainly o$ t)e e7i%tence o$ Co,rt% o$ 9,%ticeI %tillD $or t)e obtaining o$ t)e%e obCect%D 2)ic)D )o2ever val,able and i-portantD cannot be ,%e$,lly p,r%,ed 2it)o,t
-oderationD cannot be eit)er ,%e$,lly or creditably p,r%,ed ,n$airly or gained by ,n$air -ean%D not very c)annel i% or o,g)t to be open to t)e-. T)e practical ine$$icacy o$ tort,re i% notD I %,ppo%eD t)e -o%t 2eig)ty obCection to t)at -ode o$ e7a-ination... Tr,t)D li3e all ot)er good t)ing%D -ay be loved ,n2i%ely""-ay be p,r%,ed too 3eenly "" -ay co%t too -,c). And %,rely t)e -eanne%%
and t)e -i%c)ie$ o$ prying into a -an<% con$idential co--,nication% 2it) )i% legal advi%erD t)e general evil o$ in$,%ing re%erve and di%%i-,lationD ,nea%ine%%D and %,%picion and $earD into t)o%e co--,nication% 2)ic) -,%t ta3e placeD and 2)ic)D ,nle%% in a condition o$ per$ect %ec,rityD -,%t ta3e place ,%ele%%ly or 2or%eD are too great a price to pay $or tr,t) it%el$.! ST#ON" SOCIAL INTE#EST IN CO2#TS "ETTIN" IT #I"-T 8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. vii
In al-o%t every conte%ted civil action t)ere i% a di%p,te abo,t 2)at )appened. T)e co,rt )a% to decide. It -ay accept t)e clai-ant<% ver%ion o$ event%D or t)e de$endant<%. Or it -ay $ind t)e tr,t) to lie %o-e2)ere bet2een t)eir co-peting acco,nt%. Or it -ayD very e7ceptionallyD $ind it i-po%%ible to decide one 2ay or t)e ot)er. 8,t it i% i-portant to t)e partie% t)at t)e co,rt reac)e%
t)e rig)t concl,%ionD and it i% al%o i-portant to t)e good ordering o$ %ociety. To )elp t)e co,rt in it% ta%3 t)e partie% are re+,ired to -a3e available all -aterial% pertinent to it% deci%ion.
;4
Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, -ar&! o t(e Attorney-Client Privilege O1t4eig( Advantage!
DA3A"E TO 3O#AL >2STICE AND P2)LIC T#2ST F#O3 ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E FA# O2TWEI"-S ITS AD%ANTA"ES T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;4";
T)e Morales deci%ion i% an e7tre-e b,t not ,n$a-iliar e7a-ple o$ )o2 privilege% %)o2 t)e la2 to be -orally ,nC,%t. Con$identiality re-ain%D ,n+,e%tionablyD a %o,rce o$ pride 2it)in t)e legal pro$e%%ion D and an acceptably la2$,l and et)ical practice. 8,t a-ong t)o%e 2)o are not la2yer%D t)ere i% %o-et)ing palpably creepy abo,t people
2)o are et)ically bo,nd not to reveal t)e %ecret% t)at t)ey trea%,reD regardle%% o$ t)e con%e+,ence% t)at -ig)t %pill $ro- t)eir %ilence. T)e %a$eg,arding o$ %ecret% ,lti-ately co-pro-i%e% tr,t)%. W)ile t)e d,ty to t)e client i% clearD t)e -oral ab,%e o$ t)e privilege violate% t)e p,blic tr,%t. /oral C,%tice beco-e% i-po%%ible to ac)ieve 2)en attorney% $ail to reveal 2)at t)ey 3no2 2)en it i% -orally 2rong not to. T)e attorney"client privilege %erve% t)e intere%t% o$ client% 2)o 2i%) to %pea3 $ran3ly 2it) t)eir attorney%D b,t it al%o )a% t)e %ocial and -oral con%e+,ence o$ perpet,ating %ecret% and lie%. And %o-eti-e% t)e%e %ecret% )arbor an inC,%tice t)at violate% a -,c) larger principle t)an t)e -ere attorney"client privilege.
;;
Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, De endant=! #ig(t to Evidence O1t4eig(!

DEFENDANT=S #I"-T TO T-E INFO#3ATION S-O2LD T#23P P#I%ILE"E (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;64 On t)e ot)er )andD t)e )i%torical practice o$ a$$ording privilege% to %peci$ic cla%%e% o$ relation% or in$or-ation %)o,ld be recon%idered and re$or-,latedD and li-ited to t)e bare%t -ini-,- G$or e7a-pleD govern-ent %ecret% abo,t troop -ove-ent% d,ring 2arti-e and identi$ication o$ in$or-ant% in cri-inal inve%tigation%H. Even t)enD t)ere %)o,ld be no ab%ol,te privilege%D a% de-on%trated by t)e ab,%ive clai-% o$ %tate %ecret% di%c,%%ed in c)apter ;. I agree 2it) Pro$e%%or I-2in3elried<% concl,%ion t)at !virt,ally any privilege can be %,r-o,nted by t)e acc,%ed<% con%tit,tional rig)t to pre%ent evidenceD! in civil and cri-inal ca%e%.
;6
Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, %ital or 3orality

T#2T- SEE8IN" IN T#IALS C#ITICAL TO 3O#AL -EALTT)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 15 O,r -oral )ealt) i% )ealed 2)en t)ere i% an o$$icial $or,-D one o$ ,n+,iet reverenceD in 2)ic) to bring o,r grievance%. InC,%tice and indignity are not corrected on p%yc)ot)erapi%t<% co,c)e% or in Cat)olic con$e%%ional%. T)ere are ti-e% 2)en people need to depend on t)e la2D beca,%e it i% only in t)e la2D or t)ro,g) t)e la2D t)at t)e %en%e o$ -a3ing t)ing% rig)t""o$ learning t)e tr,t) and t)e le%%on% learned $ro- t)o%e tr,t)%""can beco-e ani-ated and real in t)e )eart% and -ind% o$ -en and 2o-en. And t)e re%ol,tion t)at people %ee3 i% -ainly $o,nd in t)e C,%tice t)at co-e% $ro- t)e %pectacle o$ a trial. Trial i% t)e 2ay in 2)ic) t)e legal %y%te- appro7i-ate% and arrive% at tr,t). Tr,t) cannot be di%covered in %tar c)a-ber%D dr,-)ead co,rt%D and clo%ed"door proceeding%. It -,%t be $o,nd in t)e open air o$ a p,blic trial. It i% 2)ere t)e cleare%t pict,re o$ 2)at )appened can be %een. And it i% al%o 2)ere t)e inC,redD betrayedD and violated receive t)eir day in co,rt""a real dayD not %o-e no-inalD per$,nctoryD %,per$icially cere-onial legal -o-entD b,t a tr,e dayD devoted entirely to t)e elevation o$ t)e inC,red party<% %tory and t)e di%covery o$ t)e tr,t). It i% al%o at trial 2)ere t)e p,blic 2atc)e%
2it) $a%cination and a2ait% t)e o,tco-e 2it) all t)e bated c,rio%ity o$ a =ree3 c)or,%. And it i% at trial 2)ere t)e legal %y%teprovide% t)e -o%t glaringly %y-pat)etic do,ble e7po%,re on t)e $ace o$ grie$.
3O#AL LE"ITI3AC$ #E?2I#ES T#2T--SEE8IN" T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 456 ClearlyD i$ C,%tice )a% any -oral legiti-acyD it )a% to reveal tr,t)%D and t)ere )a% to be an integrity to t)e 2ay in 2)ic) t)o%e tr,t)% are di%covered . 8,t 2)en lying i% tolerated and i% %ee-ingly per-i%%ibleD t)en t)e legal %y%te-% %)o2% it%el$ to be ,n2ort)y and ,nC,%t. Not)ing t)2art% tr,t) -ore t)an lying 2itne%%e%. It ,nder-ine% any %en%e o$ C,%ticeD and %)o2% t)e la2 to be a %)a-. #ying i% 2or%e t)an t)e -ere ri%3% a%%ociated 2it) t)e adver%arial proce%%. It<% one t)ing to
accept t)at t)e oppo%ing %ide<% trial %trategy 2a% %,perior. It<% +,ite anot)er to realiBe t)at t)e o,tco-e 2o,ld )ave been di$$erent )ad a 2itne%% %i-ply told t)e tr,t).
T#2T- )ETTE# FO# 3O#ALIT$ AND >2STICE T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 454 It<% not t)at t)e C,%tice %y%te- %anction% lying. T)e legal -ay be $,nctionally %plit $ro- t)e -oral in t)e A-erican C,%tice %y%te-D b,t t)at doe%n<t -ean t)at t)e la2 %ee% no val,e in 2itne%%e% telling t)e tr,t). It i% clearly better $or legal re%,lt% to be %,pported by act,al tr,t)%""i$ not $or -oral rea%on%D t)en $or p,rely legal one% . 8,t it doe% %ee- a% i$ t)e legal %y%te- )a% neit)er t)e ti-e nor t)e patience $or tr,t)D %ince t)ere i% apparently no
con%e+,ence to lying.
;4
Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, %ital or Societal S1rvival

SOCIET$ WILL C#23)LE IF T-E >2STICE S$STE3 DOES NOT P#IO#ITIBE T-E T#2TT)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. .."1 T)ere are grave -oral ri%3% living a-ong lie%. T)i% i% t)e central le%%on in Sop)ocle%<% Oediups Rex. T)e real Oedipal co-ple7 i% not %e7,al b,t legal. Oedip,% i% t)e 3ing o$ T)ebe%D 2)ic) i% cr,-bling at t)e very core o$ it% =ree3 col,-n%D collap%ing ,nder t)e -oral 2eig)t o$ a %ilencedD ,np,ni%)ed cri-e. A tr,t) )a% been b,ried D a %tory )a% not been told. T)e prior AingD #ai,%D 2a% -,rderedD b,t not)ing 2a% done or %aid abo,t %olving t)e cri-eD nor 2a% it %po3en o$ again. Oedip,% %ea-le%%ly %lipped into t)e $or-er 3ing<% robe. Jear% o$ %ilenceD )o2everD )ad a 2ay o$ e7po%ing and enlarging t)e crac3% in t)e -oral $o,ndation o$ t)e 3ingdo- . T)e tr,t)D and t)e telling o$ t)e %toryD i% t)e only re-edy t)at can %ave T)ebe%D beca,%e t)e con%e+,ence% o$ %,c) inC,%tice 2ill not be -ade to go a2ay %i-ply by not %pea3ing o$ it. All %ocietie% ,lti-ately corrode and cannot end,re 2)en %,rro,nded by %o -any ,ntold %torie% and in%,$$iciently p,ni%)ed cri-e%. T)at<% 2)at Oedip,% di%cover%D and it %end% )i- on )i% o2n Co,rney to C,%ticeD one t)at begin% 2it) )i% blindne%% to t)e tr,t) and end% 2it) )i% act,al blindne%%. T)e -oral i-perative to 3no2 t)e tr,t) i% inviolable.
At t)e end o$ t)e playD T)ebe% can $inally -ove $or2ard. T)e $,t,re o$ Oedip,% "" a% C,dge C,rorD and principal de$endant "" i% not a% pro-i%ingD )o2ever. In 3eeping 2it) t)e %pirit o$ a =ree3 tragedyD )e %earc)e% $or t)e tr,t) 2it) open eye% even t)o,g) it bring% abo,t )i% o2n r,in and ,lti-ate %el$"in$licted blindne%%.
Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, P1.lic Tr1!t in t(e Legal Sy!te&

T#2T- SEE8IN" AI3 AND #ES2LTS %ITAL TO P2)LIC T#2ST IN T-E LE"AL S$STE3 T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4* T)e la2 i% in,red to t)e%e practical realitie% o$ providing C,%tice. T)e p,blicD )o2everD $ind% t)i% %it,ation intolerableD and it contrib,te% to a 3ind o$ -oral rev,l%ion to2ard t)e legal %y%te- $or it% co-placency abo,t di%covering t)e tr,t). T2o partie% co-e be$ore t)e la2D eac) telling a di$$erent %tory. W)ic) %tory i% tr,eD or i% t)ere yet anot)er %tory t)at appro7i-ate% t)e tr,t) -ore acc,ratelyF T)e p,blic need% to believe t)at t)e la2 can reveal t)e tr,t)""t)at it even care% abo,t t)e tr,t) "" a% -,c) a% it need% to believe t)at t)e la2 can p,ni%) o$$ender% and re%olve con$lict%. 8,t on t)i% tread-ill to2ard re%ol,tionD t)e tr,t) lo%e% traction""t)e Beal $or $inality override% t)e tr,t) be)ind t)e %tory. T)i% $ail,re to di%ting,i%) $act% $ro- tr,t)% "" 2)at -any believe o,g)t to be t)e la2<% central ai-""i% one %o,rce o$ )o%tility t)at arti%t% )ave long directed at t)e legal %y%te- . :o2 can t)e la2 be anyt)ing i$ it<% not abo,t
e%tabli%)ing t)e tr,t)F And 2)y %)o,ld t)e p,blic )ave $ait) in an in%tit,tion t)at pro$e%%e% to be abo,t tr,t) b,t t)en deliver% a brand o$ C,%tice t)at end% ,p ,nder-ining and %,bverting t)e tr,t)F
P2)LIC WANTS >2STICE S$STE3 TO E3P-ASIBE T#2T--SEE8IN" T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. .1 I$ t)e ac3no2ledge-ent o$ t)e %tory and t)e di%covery o$ t)e tr,t) are i-portant -oral val,e%D 2)y t)en doe% t)e legal %y%te- e7celD al-o%t %y%te-aticallyD at %,bverting tr,t)% and %+,a%)ing %torie%F I$ t)e p,blic
believe% t)at t)e )all-ar3 o$ t)e C,%tice %y%te- i% to en%,re t)at victi-% are given an opport,nity to tell t)eir %torie% and to con$ront t)o%e 2)o )ave )ar-ed t)e-D t)en 2)y doe% t)e legal %y%te- 2or3 overti-e to do all t)at i% po%%ible to avoid t)e
trial% 2)ere %torie% can be told and tr,t) can be di%coveredF I% it any 2onder t)at t)e p,blic )a% %o little regard $or t)e legal %y%te- 2)en t)e la2 %)o2% %,c) di%dain $or 2)at citiBen% act,ally e7pect and 2antF A -oral and C,%t legal %y%te- i% not one t)at -erely recite% t)e lang,age o$ la2D b,t rat)er one t)at allo2% citiBen% to %pea3 in t)eir o2n 2ord%D to e7pre%% t)eir o2n $eeling%D all in t)e +,e%t $or tr,t). P2)LIC DISLI8ES P#I%ILE"E )ECA2SE T-E$ %IEW IT AS 2NDE#3ININ" T#2T-SEE8IN" T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. &5 JetD 2)en t)e $oc,% %)i$t% o,t2ardD %peci$ically to an adver%ary<% ,%e o$ t)e privilege a% a %)ield in di%covery or at trialD attit,de% to2ard t)e privilege t,rn deci%ively %o,r. Fro- t)i% per%pectiveD attorney% and t)eir client% vie2 t)e privilege a% a $or-idable barrier to a%certaining tr,t)D and t)e plainti$$%< bar in partic,lar %ee% clai-% o$ privilege a% largely over%tated and ob%tr,ctioni%t. #i3e2i%eD t)e p,blic ta3e% a di- vie2 o$ a%%ertion% o$ t)e attorney"client and ot)er privilege% by t)o%e ,nder %cr,tiny in 2ell"p,bliciBed di%p,te% or %candal% D %,c) a%
t)e tobacco litigation and t)e recent Enron debacle.
P#I%ILE"E S-O2LD NOT )E P2T A)O%E INTE"#IT$ OF T-E S$STE3 T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;;"6 In ;556 an attorney in Wa%)ington State 2a% %,%pended $ro- t)e practice o$ la2 $or %i7 -ont)% by t)e Wa%)ington S,pre-e Co,rt $or )aving violated a client con$idenceD even t)o,g) )i% di%clo%,re led to t)e re-oval o$ a corr,pt %tate"co,rt C,dge. In 411;D attorney Do,gla% Sc)ae$er 2a% in$or-ed by one o$ )i% le%% %cr,p,lo,% client% t)at =rant Ander%onD 2)o 2a% %oon to beco-e a %tate"co,rt C,dgeD 2a% abo,t to engage in i-properD ,nla2$,l cond,ct. T)ree year% laterD per)ap% in retaliation $or 9,dge Ander%on<% )aving %anctioned Sc)ae$er $or bringing a $rivolo,% la2%,itD Sc)ae$er noti$ied t)e %tate bar o$ C,dge Ander%on<% earlier -i%cond,ct. T)e Wa%)ington S,pre-e Co,rt r,led' !8eca,%e o$ Sc)ae$er<% action%D a corr,pt C,dge 2a% e7po%ed and t)e p,blic 2a% %erved by t)e C,dge<% re-oval $ro- o$$ice.! JetD t)e co,rt deter-ined t)at Sc)ae$er %)o,ld nonet)ele%% be p,ni%)ed $or )aving violated )i% client<% tr,%t. Follo2ing t)i% deci%ionD Sc)ae$er 2a% +,oted in t)e New York TimesD re%ponding t)e co,rt<% r,ling' !T)ey are clearly delivering t)e -e%%age t)at t)e %ecret% o$ a corr,pt client 2)o con%pired 2it) a corr,pt C,dge are -ore i-portant t)an t)e re%toration o$ t)e integrity o$ t)e C,dicial %y%te- .!
Sc)ae$er i% rig)tI -orallyD %,c) a r,ling -a3e% no %en%e. An -o%t lay-en 2o,ld agree. /o%t la2yer%D ,n$ort,natelyD 2o,ld not.
-A#3 TO T#2T--SEE8IN" 3EANS T-AT P#I%ILE"ES DELE"ITI3IBE T-E LE"AL S$STE3
;&
-arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' I. Introd,ction' T)e Develop-ent o$ Evidentiary Privilege% in A-erican #a2D! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 4411"4 55 One co,ld al%o arg,eD )o2everD t)at e7i%ting privilege% delegiti-ate t)e legal %y%te- . Central to t)e integrity o$ t)e legal %y%te- are t)e i-age% o$ e+,al C,%tice and tr,t)"%ee3ing. Privilege% are bo,nd to tarni%) t)e%e i-age% bot) beca,%e t)ey ba%e di%tinction% o$ legal obligation on %tat,% and beca,%e t)ey per-it t)e e7cl,%ion o$ probative evidence. /oreoverD to t)e e7tent t)at co,rt% intentionally ,%e ,ncertain r,le% b,t e-ploy t)e r)etoric o$ certaintyD t)ey
engage in a %y%te-ic deception t)at -ay )ave it% o2n delegiti-ating e$$ect.
;*
Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, Tr1t( Critical to Adver!ary Sy!te&

T#2T--SEE8IN" %ITAL TO EFFECTI%E AD%E#SA#$ S$STE3 (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &4 T)e S,pre-e Co,rt $or-ally recogniBed t)e privilege in 4.;&D and it )a% been $ollo2ed rigoro,%ly %ince t)en. T)e privilege i% !central to t)e legal %y%te- and t)e adver%ary proce%% D! 9,%tice Ant)ony Aennedy 2rote in a
Cali$ornia ca%e 2)en )e 2a% a circ,it co,rt C,dge..
T)e C,ri%pr,dential rationale $or t)e attorney"client privilege )a% been c)allenged . T)e very ba%ic concern abo,t all privilege% i% t)at t)ey violate !a $,nda-ental -a7i- t)at t)e p,blic...)a% a rig)t to every -an<% evidenceD! and t)e dean o$ A-erican evidence la2D 9o)n :enry Wig-ore. T)e nineteent)"cent,ry 8riti%) p)ilo%op)er 9ere-y 8ent)a- arg,ed t)at privilege% violated !t)e tr,t) t)eory o$ adC,dication.! Pro$e%%or Ed2ard ClearlyD an i-portant acade-ic in t)e $a%)ioning o$ t)e -odern A-erican r,le% o$ evidence D called privilege% !bloc3ade% to t)e +,e%t $or tr,t).! T)e e%%ential rationale o$ t)e adver%ary %y%te- i% c)allenged by r,le% t)at e7cl,de evidence t)at 2o,ld lead to t)e di%covery o$ tr,t). AD%E#SA#$ S$STE3 )2ILT ON P#E3ISE T-AT IT IS T-E )EST WA$ TO FIND T-E T#2T(onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;;4 T)e $,nda-ental dile--a abo,t privileged co--,nication% i% t)at t)e adver%arial trial proce%% i% a %earc) $or tr,t)D b,t t)at %earc) -ay be i-peded by e7cl,ding certain relevant b,t privileged evidence . (evered intellect,al% %,c) a% 9o)n #oc3e and Oliver Wendell :ol-e% 9r. )ave arg,ed t)at t)e dyna-ic de-ocratic -ar3etplace o$ idea% i% t)e be%t place% to enco,rage t)e %earc) $or tr,t). T)e adver%ary %y%te- and it% r,le% o$ evidence are predicated on t)i% notion. T)ere are veteran trial la2yer% 2)o 2o,ld %nic3er at t)e %,gge%tion t)at 2)at goe% on in t)e trial %y%te- i% a %earc) $or tr,t)D rat)er t)an a parti%an battle to 2in t)at -ay be aided by conceal-ent and ob$,%cation and i% C,%ti$ied by victory. Trial la2yer% 3no2D and cynical lay ob%erver% int,it Ge%pecially a$ter t)e perva%ive coverage o$ t)e O.9. Si-p%on ca%eHD t)at !tr,t)! i% 2)at advocate% -ay %ay t)ey are a$ter b,t victory i% t)e real goal o$ co-bative trial% tr,t) not2it)%tanding. T)e +,e%tion 2)et)er t)e adver%ary %y%te- i% t)e be%t proce%% $or attaining
tr,t) i% t)e ric) %,bCect o$ anot)er boo3. T)e pre%ent in+,iry pre%,-e% t)at t)e adver%ary %y%te-"")o2ever i-per$ect""i% t)e one 2e ,%e $or %ee3ing tr,t)I it i% t)e %y%te- 2e )aveD and 2e are not li3ely to replace it.
T#2T- IS T-E P#I3A#$ DETE#3INANT OF W-ET-E# T-E AD%E#SA#$ S$STE3 P#OD2CES >2STICE Dean (obert =ilbert >o(n!ton @ Sara L1 rano' Pro e!!or La4 St1dent->o(n 3ar!(all Sc(ool o La4' *++*' !T)e Adver%ary Sy%te- a% a /ean% o$ See3ing Tr,t) and 9,%ticeD! 6 9. /ar%)all #. (ev. 44*D p. 4 4 T)e adver%ary %y%te- i% t)e %y%te- e-ployed in t)e @nited State% to re%olve litigation di%p,te%. It relie% on t)e !,n%)a3able $o,ndation t)at tr,t) i% t)e obCect o$ t)e %y%te-<% proce%% 2)ic) i% de%igned $or t)e p,rpo%e o$ di%pen%ing C,%tice.! n & I$ t)e %y%te- allo2% any ,ntr,t)$,lne%% or lac3 o$ candor to e7i%tD t)e proce%% lo%e% validity. n * I$ t)e adver%ary %y%te- lo%e% validityD t)ere 2ill no longer be any rea%on $or t)e %y%te- to contin,e. n . To a%%,re t)at a tr,t)$,l and C,%t o,tco-e re%,lt%D attorney% are bo,nd by t)e (,le% o$ Pro$e%%ional Cond,ct a% adopted
by t)e %tate in 2)ic) t)ey practice. In additionD beca,%e di%covery play% a -aCor role in arriving at t)e tr,t) o$ a la2%,itD attorney% are al%o bo,nd by t)e r,le% o$ di%covery 2it)in t)e Federal (,le% o$ Civil Proced,re.
T#2T--SEE8IN" IS T-E P#I3A#$ "OAL OF T-E AD%E#SA#IAL S$STE3 Dean (obert =ilbert >o(n!ton @ Sara L1 rano' Pro e!!or La4 St1dent->o(n 3ar!(all Sc(ool o La4' *++*' !T)e Adver%ary Sy%te- a% a /ean% o$ See3ing Tr,t) and 9,%ticeD! 6 9. /ar%)all #. (ev. 44*D p. 4&5"4 T)e ,lti-ate p,rpo%e o$ t)e adver%ary %y%te- i% to %ee3 tr,t) and C,%tice . To ac)ieve t)i% p,rpo%eD t)e %y%tereg,late% attorney%< cond,ct t)ro,g) t)e /odel (,le% a% adopted by eac) partic,lar %tate and t)e Federal (,le%. T)e /odel (,le% i-po%e a d,ty on attorney%D a% o$$icer% o$ t)e co,rtD and to t)e p,blic. T)e $ir%t priority o$ t)e adver%ary %y%te- i% arriving
at a tr,t)$,l and C,%t re%,lt. Attorney% -,%t re-e-ber t)at t)ey are !o$$icer% o$ t)e co,rt! andD a% %,c)D o2e pri-ary allegiance to t)e ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice. An attorney<% d,ty to t)e p,blic a% an o$$icer o$ t)e co,rt precede% )i% or )er d,ty to t)e client.
;.
;1
Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, Privilege S(o1ld Not S1rvive Client=! Deat(
32ST CONST#2E P#I%ILE"ES NA##OWL$ SO AS TO -A%E T-E LEAST POSSI)LE INF#IN"E3ENT ON T#2T--SEE8IN" - S-O2LD NOT S2#%I%E DEAT- OF CLIENT 9,lie Peter% Ba&acona' La4 St1dent' :///' !Attorney"Client Privilege S,rvive% t)e Deat) o$ t)e Client...! ;4 @. Ar3. #ittle (oc3 #. (ev. ;**D p. ;14" T)e di%%enting opinion pic3ed ,p 2)ere t)e -aCority opinion le$t o$$. T)e $,nda-ental pre-i%e $ro- 2)ic) 9,%tice O<Connor developed )er di%%ent 2a% t)e incon%i%tency in t)e protection% a$$orded by privilege and t)e C,dicial goal o$ tr,t)"%ee3ing. 9,%tice O<Connor %,pported t)e co,rt o$ appeal%< balancing te%tD re$lecting t)at evidentiary privilege% -,%t be con%tr,ed narro2ly and !give 2ay! 2)ere not C,%ti$ied in t)e p,blic intere%t. 9,%tice O<Connor al%o e7pre%%ed %,pport $or e7a-ination o$ t)e privilege 2)ere it% ,%e 2o,ld $r,%trate C,%tice. W)ile recogniBing a decea%ed client<% per%onalD rep,tationalD and econo-ic intere%t in con$identialityD 9,%tice O<Connor
%tre%%ed t)at 2ere t)e client livingD t)e $act% )e %)ared 2it) )i% attorney 2o,ld not be privilegedD and i$ nece%%aryD co,ld be di%clo%ed ,nder a grant o$ i--,nity. 9,%tice O<Connor e7pre%%ed concern $or t)e %cenario 2)ere an innocent de$endant -ig)t be convicted de%pite e7c,lpatory in$or-ation 3no2n by a decea%ed client<% attorney. Follo2ing an act",tilitarian $ra-e2or3D 9,%tice O<Connor<% di%%ent 2a% $ra,g)t 2it) rel,ctance to )old t)e rig)t to con$idential co--,nication% ,niver%ally %,pre-e to t)e rig)t% o$ an innocent de$endantI )o2everD 9,%tice O<Connor $,rt)er called $or a po%t),-o,% e7ception ,pon a %)o2ing o$ a co-pelling la2 en$orce-ent need $or privileged in$or-ation. (at)er t)an per-itting t)e attorney"client privilege to %erve a% a
co-plete bar to po%t"-orte- di%clo%,reD t),% allo2ing di%tortion o$ t)e C,dicial record or t)e p,rpo%e$,l -i%leading o$ t)e $act$inderD 9,%tice O<Connor 2o,ld advance t)e application o$ an in ca-era balancing te%t $or $act,al in$or-ation ot)er2i%e ,nattainable. POST-3O#TE3 P#I%IL"E S-O2LD NOT T#23P SOCIETAL INTE#ESTS IN LAW ENFO#CE3ENT AND P#OTECTIN" T-E INNOCENT 9,lie Peter% Ba&acona' La4 St1dent' :///' !Attorney"Client Privilege S,rvive% t)e Deat) o$ t)e Client...! ;4 @. Ar3. #ittle (oc3 #. (ev. ;**D p. ;1& In concl,dingD 9,%tice O<Connor +,e%tioned t)e tacit acceptance o$ t)e po%t" -orte- attorney"client privilege a% an e%tabli%)ed co--on la2 traditionD $oc,%ing on t)e vac,,- o$ rea%oned e7pre%% )olding% rat)er t)an t)e -any )olding%
e7pre%%ing t)e -ere pre%,-ption o$ it% %,rvival. (elying on -any o$ t)e %a-e a,t)oritie% a% t)e co,rt o$ appeal% and t)e Independent Co,n%elD 9,%tice O<Connor concl,ded by %tating )er di%li3e $or t)e co%t% i-po%ed by %ilence. IndeedD 9,%tice O<Connor<% %trong
pre$erence i% $or an e7ception to t)e po%t"-orte- attorney"client privilege 2)en nece%%ary to protect t)e rig)t% o$ an innocent cri-inal de$endant or a co-pelling la2 en$orce-ent intere%t.
65
Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, Cri&e-Fra1d ECception Con ir&!

C#I3E-F#A2D E9CEPTION P#O%ES T-AT T#2T--SEE8IN" DOES SO3ETI3ES T#23P >2STICE-EN-ANCIN" "OALS A,b,rn A. Daily @ S. 8ritta T(orn01i!t' La4 St1dent!-"eorgeto4n 2niver!ity' *++ED !:a% t)e E7ception O,tgro2n t)e PrivilegeF!D 4& =eo. 9. #egal Et)ic% .6D p. . "&
T)e attorney"client privilege !enco,rageK%L $,ll and $ran3 co--,nication% bet2een attorney% and t)eir client%! by -a3ing %,c) co--,nication% con$idential. T)e privilege doe% notD )o2everD protect co--,nication% -ade in $,rt)erance o$
a cri-e or $ra,d beca,%e !t)e co%t% to tr,t)"%ee3ing o,t2eig) t)e C,%tice"en)ancing e$$ect% o$ a co-plete and candid attorney"client conver%ation.! Deter-ining 2)et)er t)e e7ception applie% depend% not on t)e occ,rrence o$ a cri-e or $ra,dD b,t rat)er on t)e client<% intent at t)e ti-e )e %o,g)t t)e attorney<% advice. T)e e7ception applie% i$ t)e client intended to con%,lt 2it) a la2yer in $,rt)erance o$ an intended cri-e or $ra,d. De-on%trating t)e re+,i%ite cri-inal intent -ay
be )ig)ly proble-atic. It i% di$$ic,ltD i$ not i-po%%ibleD $or attorney% or t)e co,rt% to obCectively deter-ine 2)at t)e client<% intent 2a% in %ee3ing legal advice.
64
AT, "Tr1t( See5ing 3ore I&portant to >1!tice Sy!te& t(at Protection o Individ1al A1tono&y"
SEA#C- FO# T#2T- DOES NOT T#ADE OFF WIT- #ESPECT FO# DI"NIT$ Daniel Wal i!(' La4 Cler5 or So1t(ern Di!trict o N$' *++<' !/a3ing #a2yer% (e%pon%ible $or t)e Tr,t)D! 6 Seton :all #. (ev. &46D p. &;; Freed-an<% re%pon%e to Fran3el e%%entially ended t)ereD alt)o,g) a% a logical -atterD )i% an%2er 2a% not co-plete. Freed-an did not e7plain 2)y dignity re+,ire% proce%%e% t)at di%tort t)e tr,t). T)at i%D even i$ dignity i% o$ para-o,nt concernD and t)e only 2ay to %erve dignity i% t)ro,g) proce%%D it i% not clear 2)y t)at proce%% -,%t override t)e tr,t). Freed-an doe% not e7plain 2)y dignity 2o,ld be at ri%3 ,nder proced,re% de%igned to pro-ote rat)er t)an %,bordinate tr,t).
6;
S(o1ld Eli&inate Attorney-Client Privilege - )etter or >1!tice

ELI3INATIN" ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E )ETTE# FO# >2STICE (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &; I% t)e %y%te- better !$or a$$ording to cri-inal% a c)ance o$ e%cape D! 8ent)a- a%3edF T)e %a$ety o$ t)e innocent i% not CeopardiBed by eli-inating t)e r,le o$ privilege. T)e la2 %)o,ld not be t)e ene-y o$ t)e innocentD t)i% arg,-ent propo%e%I 2)y dread t)e tr,t)F Attorney% do not "" %)o,ld not "" )ire t)e-%elve% o,t to $r,%trate C,%tice or del,de C,rie% t)ro,g) arti$ice. !T)e pro$e%%ional la2yer 2o,ld be a -ini%ter o$ C,%ticeD not an abettor o$ cri-e D! 8ent)a- arg,edD 2ere t)e attorney"client privilege eli-inated. ELI3INATIN" P#I%ILE"E ONL$ -2#TS "2ILT$ CLIENTS -- P#ESE#%ES >2STICE (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &; W)yD critic% a%3D %)o,ld di%clo%,re% o$ con$idential co--,nication% bet2een an attorney and client be dee-ed treac)ero,% or i--oral betrayal% o$ tr,%tF I$ di%covering t)e tr,t) and p,ni%)ing -i%cond,ct are t)e goal% o$ t)e C,%tice %y%te-D 2)at i% t)e -i%c)ie$ in %ee3ing evidence $ro- attorney% cynic% a%3F So 2)at i$ a denial o$ t)i% privilege 2o,ld di%co,rage client% $rocon$e%%ing t)eir g,iltF W)y %)o,ld t)e la2 enco,rage delin+,ent% $ro- e%caping t)e con%e+,ence% o$ t)eir act%F W)at -a3e% an attorney an acce%%ory a$ter t)e
$act to a cri-e by allo2ing t)e attorney to a%%i%t t)e 2rongdoer in concealing cri-e and e%caping p,ni%)-entF I$ t)e privilege i% deniedD t)e c)arge contin,e%D innocent client% 2ill be aided and t)e g,ilty one% 2ill not be able to $r,%trate t)e la2 and evade t)e tr,t). I% t)e trial %y%te- a pernicio,% ga-eF W)ere doe% virt,e lie in t)i% C,ri%pr,dential con$lictF S)o,ldn<t t)e la2yer be t)e -ini%ter o$ C,%tice and g,ardian o$ tr,t)D rat)er t)an a abettor o$ cri-e% and %,borner o$ -endacityF A% 8ent)a- a%3ed' !W)ence co-e% it t)at any one love% dar3ne%% better t)an lig)tD e7cept it be t)at t)i% deed% are evil.!
66
S(o1ld Weig( Attorney-Client Privilege in Individ1al Ca!e!

S-O2LD S2)>ECT P#I%ILE"E TO 3O#E CA#EF2L WEI"-IN" OF P2)LIC AND DEFENDANT #I"-TS (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;6* Relaxing the ttorne!"#lient Privilege. T)ere %)o,ld be a -ore e7pan%ive and balanced approac) to t)e attorney" client privilege. T)ere are ot)er appropriate e7ception% to t)e privilege beyond t)e traditional cri-e $ra,d and 2ill"conte%t e7ception%. W)en a client i% decea%edD and 2)en t)ere are %trong policy rea%on% to -a3e an e7ception to attorney"client con$identialityD co,rt% %)o,ld be able to do %o. T)e -edia advi%er in litigation
%)o,ld be )eld by t)e partie% to t)e agreed",pon %tandard o$ con$identiality and %)o,ld be acco,ntable $or brea3ing t)at pro-i%e. :e or %)e o,g)t not to be able to claiprivilege ,nder %o-e %tretc)ed attorney"client clai-. Corporate and ot)er in%tit,tional attorney% %)o,ld be $ree to di%clo%e cri-inal act% 2it)o,t $earing %el$"incri-inationD and %toc3)older% and ot)er% %)o,ld )ave acce%% to evidence o$ in%ider -i%cond,ct by corporate -anager%. 8ar r,le% regarding con$identiality codi$y i-portant pro$e%%ional nor-%. 8,t t)ey %)o,ld not be ab%ol,te . W)en t)e intere%t% o$ C,%tice -ani$e%tly 2arrant itD e7ception% %)o,ld be -ade by t)e pre%iding co,rt% . T)ere i% no rea%on t)at a citiBen %)o,ld be e7po%ed to ,nC,%t adC,dication Gt)e adC,dication o$ capital p,ni%)-entD $or e7a-pleHD a% in t)e 0irginia ca%e di%c,%%ed in c)apter 6D beca,%e r,le% ""even 2i%e general r,le% "" are not open to appropriate e7ception%. T)e S,pre-e Co,rt )a% %tated t)at di%clo%ing allegedly privileged -aterial% to a trial co,rt to deter-ine t)e -erit% o$ a clai- o$ privilege doe% not end t)e privilege. In ca-era in%pection i% a co--on C,dicial practice. In t)i% conte7tD and in -any ot)er% %,c) a% clai-% o$ %tate %ecret%D it pre%erve% t)e e%%ence o$ clai-% o$ con$identiality and privilege at t)e %a-e ti-e a% it control% e7ce%%ive and i-proper clai-%.
S-O2LD S2)>ECT P#I%ILE"E CLAI3S TO CASE-)$-CASE E%AL2ATION (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;4; ObCection% to de-and% $or evidence -ay be ba%ed on clai-% o$ con$identiality. 8,t ,lti-atelyD 2)en t)ere i% a con$lictD t)e deci%ion i% not $or t)e partie% to -a3e b,t %)o,ld be -ade by t)e pre%iding C,dge I it %)o,ld not be ba%ed on %o-e r,le o$ privilege t)at ta3e% t)e deci%ion o,t o$ t)e deci%ion"-a3ing proce%%. T)e g,iding principle %)o,ld be 2)et)er t)e overriding p,blic intere%t% re+,ire% t)e protection o$ con$identiality or t)e di%clo%,re o$ t)e te%ti-ony or doc,-ent% in contention. A -ode $or %,c) an approac) i% $o,nd in t)e DC %tat,te -entioned in c)apter
* t)at per-it% C,dge% to decide 2)en t)e intere%t% o$ p,blic C,%tice 2arrant protecting a 2itne%% $ro- legal proce%%.
P#I%ILE"E PITS TWO I3PO#TANT SOCIAL INTE#ESTS A"AINST EAC- OT-E# 8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. ; T)e privilege t)ere$ore involve% an interaction or -ore acc,rately a cla%)D bet2een co-peting p,blic intere%t%.
Nic)oll% identi$ied t)e t2o intere%t% in R v $er%! Magistrates #ourt, e p &. !T)e p,blic intere%t in t)e e$$icient 2or3ing o$ t)e legal %y%te-
#ord
re+,ire% t)at people %)o,ld be able to obtain pro$e%%ional legal advice on t)eir rig)t% and liabilitie% and obligation%. T)i% i% de%irable $or t)e orderly cond,ct o$ everyday a$$air%. Si-ilarlyD people %)o,ld be able to %ee3 legal advice and a%%i%tance in connection 2it)
t)e proper cond,ct o$ co,rt proceeding%. To t)i% end co--,nication% bet2een client% and la2yer% -,%t be ,nin)ibited...
T)e ot)er a%pect o$ t)e p,blic intere%t i% t)at all relevant -aterial %)o,ld be available to co,rt% 2)en deciding ca%e%. Co,rt% %)o,ld not )ave to reac) deci%ion% in ignorance o$ t)e content% o$ doc,-ent% or ot)er -aterial 2)ic)D i$ di%clo%edD -ig)t 2ell a$$ect t)e o,tco-e.!
64
Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to Con!tit1tional #ig(t!- "enerally

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E NOT ESSENTIAL TO #I"-T TO #EP#ESENTATION -LE"ITI3IBES LAW$E#S TO ACT IN 2N>2ST AND I33O#AL WA$S T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;&"*
In an article in t)e New York TimesD #a2rence 9. Fo7D a la2yer in P)iladelp)iaD 2a% +,oted a% %ayingD !Con$identiality i% 2)ere t)e r,bber -eet% t)e road. I$ client% aren<t a%%,red o$ con$identialityD t)ey tend to 2it))old in$or-ation. I$ t)ey don<t %)are everyt)ingD 2e 2on<t be able to de$end t)e- a% 2ell.! 8,t i% t)at really tr,eF Do people vi%it la2yer% only beca,%e t)ey )ave a %ecret and 2ant to be able to con$ide in
%o-eone 2)o can give t)e- advice on )o2 to en%,re t)at t)e %ecret re-ain %ecretedD $oreverF Or do t)ey co-e to la2yer% beca,%e t)ey )ave a proble-D and t)ey are )oping t)at t)e attorney 2ill be able to $ind a %ol,tion to t)e proble-D and one o$ t)o%e %ol,tion% -ig)t act,ally be t)e ,nb,rdening o$ t)e %ecret it%el$F #a2yer% -i%ta3enly overe%ti-ate t)e i-portance o$ t)e privilege to t)eir client%. /any people aren<t even a2are o$ t)e privilege ,ntil t)eir attorney advi%e% t)e- o$ it. De%pite 2)at la2yer% believeD t)e privilege i%n<t t)e -ain dra2 o$ t)eir pro$e%%ion. It<% only an et)ical byprod,ct o$ t)e CobD %,pported by %el$"governing r,le% t)at di%tance la2yer% $ro- decent"t)in3ingD -oral -en and 2o-en. So t)en 2)y %)o,ld legal et)ic% override private -oralityF T)e et)ical d,tie% o$ t)e legal pro$e%%ion are being %)a-ele%%ly ab,%ed in 2ay% t)at prevent la2yer% $ro- doing t)e rig)t t)ing. P#I%ILE"ES NOT "I%EN SA3E LE%EL OF P#OTECTION AS E9CL2SIONA#$ #2LES (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. 65"4 T)ere i% a di$$erence bet2een privilege r,le% and e7cl,%ionary r,le% ,nder t)e Fir%tD Fo,rt)D and Fi$t) A-end-ent%. T)e con%tit,tional e7cl,%ionary r,le% are de%igned to di%co,rage govern-ent -i%cond,ct ""brea3ing into
%o-eone<% )o-e i% an illegal %earc)I coercing a con$e%%ion violate% t)e %el$"incri-inating cla,%e""even at t)e co%t o$ lo%ing credible evidence. T)e evidence %eiBed or coerced -ay be probative Gdr,g% $o,nd on t)e pre-i%e%H or +,e%tionable Ga con$e%%ion -ade ,nder d,re%% -ay be inacc,rateH. #i3e t)e privilege r,le%D t)e%e e7cl,%ionary r,le% e7i%t to pro-ote a %ocial policy. 8,t ,nli3e privilege%D t)e%e con%tit,tional e7cl,%ionary r,le% cannot be ta-pered 2it) by co,rt% and
legi%lat,re%. Privilege% are de%igned to enco,rage relation%)ip%I con%tit,tional rig)t% e7i%t to di%co,rage govern-ent -i%cond,ct. T)e $or-er -ay be conditionalI t)e latter are clo%e to ab%ol,te. NO E3PI#ICAL P#OOF T-AT T-E P#I%ILE"E IS NECESSA#$ FO# OPEN CO332NICATION WIT- AN ATTO#NE$ (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &4" Pro$e%%or I-2in3elried<% e7)a,%tive e7a-ination o$ t)e p)ilo%op)ical ,nderpinning% o$ t)e attorney"client privilege concl,de% t)at t)e in%tr,-ental rationaleD alt)o,g) t)e -aCoritarian vie2 over ti-eD 2a% ba%ed on anecdotalD %el$"%ervingD and e-pirically ,n%,pported proo$. T)e relatively $e2 recent G41&5D 41.5H %t,die% on t)e ca,%al relation bet2een client%< di%clo%,re% to attorney% and t)e a%%,rance o$ a later privilege are inade+,ate and e7aggeratedD and t),% -i%placedD Pro$e%%or I-2in3elried concl,de%. T)at %aidD )e doe% not +,e%tion t)e overall 2i%do- o$ t)e r,leD only t)e rationale $or it. Ot)er% )ave +,e%tioned t)e r,le<% 2i%do-D noting t)at cri-inal de$en%e attorney% invariably do not 2ant client% to be totally open 2it) t)e-D $earing t)at i$ t)ey Gt)e attorney%H 3no2 abo,t g,ilty cond,ctD t)ey -ay be prevented $ro- p,r%,ing aven,e% o$ de$en%e.
Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to E ective De en!e

T#2T--TELLIN" 2NDE#3INES EFFECTI%E DEFENSE Albert W. Al!(1ler' La4 Pro e!!or-$ale' *++E' !#a2 and Tr,t)' T)e #a2yer<% (e%pon%ibility to t)e Tr,t)' #a2yer% and Tr,t)"TellingD! ;& :arv. 9.#. M P,b. Pol<y 4.1D p. 4.1 So-e la2yer% %ay t)ey never 3no2 2)at t)e tr,t) i%""not even 2)en a client )a% con$e%%ed )i% g,ilt. Even -ore reCect t)e conventional 2i%do- t)at a la2yer %)o,ld de%cribe t)e attorney"client privilege to a client and pre%% t)e client )ard $or t)e tr,t) to avoid being %,rpri%ed at trial. T)e%e la2yer% don<t 2ant t)eir client% to level 2it) t)e-. Not 3no2ing t)e tr,t) -a3e% it ea%ier to avoid t)e et)ical i%%,e. OPEN CO332NICATION WIT- ATTO#NE$ NOT 8E$ TO EFFECTI%E #EP#ESENTATION Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6&& Stated broadlyD t)e clai- t)at la2yer% can be e$$ective only 2)en in$or-ed o$ all relevant $act% i% %i-ply ,ntr,e. Attorney% do 2it)o,t in$or-ation in a broad variety o$ conte7t%. To -a3e %en%eD t)e arg,-ent in %,pport o$ con$identiality -,%t t),% be rede$ined a% $ollo2%' #a2yer% 2)o%e client% )ide in$or-ation are li3ely to per$or- le%% ably. 8y enco,raging client di%clo%,re t)ro,g) %ecrecy g,arantee%D t)e %tate protect% client% 2)o ot)er2i%e 2o,ld CeopardiBe t)eir ca%e by 2it))olding in$or-ation. Pro$e%%or /organ long ago +,e%tioned t)e need to protect ,ncooperative or deceit$,l client%. T)e client 2)o receive% bad advice beca,%e )e $ail% to in$or- t)e la2yer )a% only )i-%el$ to bla-e. AlternativelyD i$ t)e client lie% to t)e la2yer and later $ind% )i-%el$ con$ronted by t)e tr,t)D t)e govern-ent )a% little rea%on to aid t)e client. T)e la2 %)o,ld probably not be 2ritten $or t)e bene$it o$ liar% or perC,rer%. OPEN CO332NICATION NOT NECESSA#$ FO# EFFECTI%E #EP#ESENTATION Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6&* I$ t)e client doe% 2it))old partic,larly e-barra%%ing ite-%D it i% not clear t)at t)e repre%entation 2ill be %igni$icantly a$$ected. In %o-e %etting%D la2yer% act,ally 2o,ld pre$er not to be told everyt)ing t)e client 3no2%. Even a la2yer 2)o ideally 2o,ld li3e to 3no2 all relevant $act% o$ten can provide good legal advice ba%ed on partial in$or-ation. St,die% %,gge%t t)at cri-inal de$endant% rarely are $ran3 2it) t)eir la2yer% . Jet t)e cri-inal C,%tice %y%te- relie% on t)e pre%,-ption t)at t)e%e client% are nevert)ele%% $airly and 2ell repre%ented. SOCIETAL INTE#ESTS O2TWEI"- "OPEN CO332NICATION" )ENEFIT OF P#I%ILE"E Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6&*
I do not %,gge%t t)at con$identiality r,le% )ave no e$$ect on client $ort)rig)tne%% or t)e +,ality o$ repre%entation. 8,t in t)e ab%tractD it
i% di$$ic,lt to deter-ine t)e e7tent o$ any e$$ect. I$ t)e n,-ber o$ client% needing and de%erving t)e protection o$ ab%ol,te r,le% are indeed $e2D t)e intere%t in !a%%,ring e$$ective repre%entation! -ay be o,t2eig)ed by %ociety<% alternative intere%t% in allo2ing li-ited di%clo%,re%.
6&
Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to Con!tit1tional #ig(t! - Privacy

CONFIDENTIALIT$ DISTINCT F#O3 P#I%AC$ (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;; T)i% evolving rig)t o$ privacy i% di%tinct $rocon$identialityD t)o,g) t)e ter-% are %o-eti-e% inter-ingled . T)e ter- privac! i% ,%ed to de%cribe general de-and% $or anony-ityD control over one<% identityD %el$" deter-inationD o2ner%)ip o$ per%onal dataD and t)e rig)t to be le$t aloneI con'identialit! re$er% to 3eeping per%onal %ecret% and in$or-ation private.
6*
Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to Con!tit1tional #ig(t! - Bealo1! AdvocacyFAdver!arial Sy!te& )ad
BEALOT#$ E9ACE#)ATES ALL FO#3S OF E%IL T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;1 >ealotry i% bad. It i% a %o,rce o$ evil. Act,allyD it i% t)e )ig)e%t $,l$ill-ent o$ evilD beca,%e 2)atever $or- it ta3e% D and to 2)atever rea%on it o2e% it% e7i%tenceD it i% )ar-le%% 2it)o,t t)e engine o$ Bealotry t)at t,rn% it $ro- -ere %,ppre%%ed $eeling% into ani-atedD irrepre%%ible rage. /o%t o$ ,% 2o,ld %ay t)at -oderationD toleranceD and ,n%el$i%) act% o$ caring and connection are val,e% to 2)ic) people %)o,ld a%pire. >ealotry i% $or people 2)o are o,t o$ control in t)eir belie$%D co-pletely loc3ed into t)eir o2n tr,t)%D and o,t o$ to,c) 2it) t)e re%t o$ t)e planet. T)ey place val,e only on t)eir o2n val,e%. T)eir loyaltie% are ,n%)a3eable 2it)in t)eir %ecret %ocietie%. T)e 2orld -a3e%
no %en%e to t)e- 2it)o,t t)e nicotine 3ic3 t)at co-e% $ro- attac)ing a )ealt)y do%e o$ Beal to a -i%%ion ot)er2i%e benign.
6.
Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to Adver!ary Sy!te&

AD%E#SA#IAL S$STE3 DESI"NED TO FIND T-E T#2T- SO3ETI3ES O)SC2#ES IT Daniel Wal i!(' La4 Cler5 or So1t(ern Di!trict o N$' *++<' !/a3ing #a2yer% (e%pon%ible $or t)e Tr,t)D! 6 Seton :all #. (ev. &46D p. &;6"4 A %econd %trand o$ arg,-ent again%t t)e propo%ition t)at la2yer% %)o,ld be re%pon%ible $or t)e tr,t) i% t)at an adver%ary %y%te- de%igned to arrive at t)e tr,t) 2ill %o-eti-e% ob%c,re t)e tr,t) . @viller contended t)at
de$en%e co,n%el cannot nece%%arily 3no2 or recogniBe t)e tr,t) and t)at Fran3el !proceed% $ro- t)e a%%,-ption t)at t)e %)ining Tr,t) i% 3no2n or 3no2able by all diligent la2yer% acting in good $ait).! According to @villerD de$en%e co,n%el -ig)t not
3no2 or recogniBe !t)e tr,t)! beca,%e ca%e% are tried not on !t)e tr,t)D! b,t on evidenceD 2)ic) i% rarely ,na-big,o,%. A de$en%e %)o,ld not be %)aped by t)e de$en%e la2yer<% per%onal eval,ation o$ t)e tr,e %tate o$ a$$air%D $or it i% not t)e de$en%e la2yer<% Cob to eval,ate credibility. Even 2)en a de$en%e la2yer 3no2% to a certainty 2)ic) $act% are tr,e and 2)ic) are notD t)ere i% %till an intere%tD @viller %,gge%t%D in )olding t)e %tate to it% b,rden o$ proo$. T)e adver%ary %y%te- i% de%igned to prevent t)e conviction o$ innocent per%on% at t)e e7pen%e o$ ac+,itting %o-e g,ilty one%. T)i% goal i% %erved by
)aving a de$en%e la2yer relentle%%ly c)allenge t)e %tate<% ca%eD even 2)en t)e de$en%e la2yer 3no2% t)at t)e ca%e )a% -erit. @viller al%o arg,ed t)at t)ere i% a di$$erence bet2een !,lti-ate and ... in%tr,-ental $act%.! :e ,%ed t)e e7a-ple o$ a la2yer de$ending a -an 2)o- t)e la2yer believe% co--itted t)e robbery 2it) 2)ic) )e i% c)arged. I$ t)e de$en%e attorney believe% t)at a
2itne%%< te%ti-ony i% $al%eD !attac3ing t)at 2itne%% %erve% t)e in%tr,-ental tr,t) b,t -ay de$eat t)e ,lti-ate tr,t).! A de$ender o$ Fran3el<% propo%itionD according to @villerD -,%t c)oo%e bet2een pro)ibiting tr,t)" de$eating tactic% and allo2ing de$en%e co,n%el to 3eep all evidence tr,t)$,l. @viller<% po%itionD )o2everD appear% to
be $la2ed. Fran3el did not clai- t)at a la2yer -,%t co,ntenance ,ntr,t)$,l -ean% in t)e %ervice o$ tr,t)$,l end%. Fran3el<% propo%al 2o,ld not )ave prevented a la2yer $ro- attac3ing a $al%e 2itne%%D even i$ t)e re%,lt 2ere to prevent t)e e-ergence o$ t)e ,lti-ate tr,t).
61
Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to A1tono&y

COSTS TO >2STICE O2TWEI"- P#OTECTION OF INDI%ID2AL A2TONO3$ (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;;*". One can al%o +,e%tion t)e ),-ani%tic rationale $or privilege%. E7ception% are condoned in n,-ero,% in%tance%D %o one<% concl,%ion% abo,t 2)at i% ),-ane i% %,bCective and ela%tic. W)at i% t)e )ar- i$ people in t)erapy or in con$e%%ion or in ot)er pro$e%%ional con%,ltation% 2ere to lo%e t)e co-$ort o$ 3no2ing t)at t)eir co--,nication% 2o,ld al2ay% re-ain con$idential and )ad to accept t)at t)eir co--,nication% co,ld conceivablyD occa%ionallyD beco-e p,blicF I% t)at not a rea%onable part o$ t)eir %ocial contractD a $air price to pay $or an adver%ary %y%te-D a %y%te- to 2)ic) t)ey t)e-%elve% -ay need to re%ortF O,r %ocial contract re+,ire% conce%%ion%D on bot) %ide%D in all policy con$lict%. T)e clai- t)at inva%ion% o$ per%onal a,tono-y re$lect an in),-ane val,e %y%te- ignore% t)e potential greater good t)at -ig)t re%,lt $rodi%clo%,re . In a balanced %y%te-D con$identiality 2o,ld be en%,red ,nle%% a C,dge deter-ined t)at -ore pro$o,nd rea%on% 2ere de-on%trated $or di%clo%,re in t)at one incident. "#O2NDIN" P#I%ILE"E IN A2TONO3$ TE#3S 3EANS T-E#E IS NO #EASONA)LE LI3IT ON IT (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;;. T)e recent trend )a% been to rationaliBe privilege% "" and to +,ali$y t)e-"" by applying t)e ),-ani%tic rationale. T)at notion i% ver%atileD )a% con%tit,tional re$erence%D and re$lect% -odern inclination% to protect per%onal in$or-ation a% an i-portant a%pect o$ individ,al decencyD ),-an dignityD and de-ocratic val,e%. Privacy rig)t% generally are a
t2entiet)"cent,ry p)eno-enonD and t)e pre%ervation o$ privileged co--,nication% on t)e ba%i% o$ -oralD ),-ani%tic gro,nd% i% part o$ t)at trend. Protecting con$identiality allo2% citiBen% to con%,lt 2it) e7pert% abo,t i-portant li$e i%%,e%
intelligently and independentlyD 2it)o,t $ear o$ govern-ent intr,%ion. T)e%e val,e% )ave root% in t)e 8ill o$ (ig)t%. T)e proble- 2it) a +,ali$iedD ,nde$ined privilege created ,nder t)e -erging ),-ani%tic rationale i% t)at it lo%e% predictability "" an i-portant val,e in t)e la2. W)at con$idential relation%)ip i% not ),-ane and a ,%e$,l part o$ one<% a,tono-yF (elation%)ip% 2it) $a-ily -e-ber%D teac)er%D $id,ciarie%D and agent% in b,%ine%%D con%,ltant%
o$ all 3ind%D $riend%D c,%to-er%D ban3%D arc)itect%D coac)e%D all -ig)t +,ali$y ,nder %,c) an a-orp)o,% rationale. W)y protect one and not anot)erF Foreign co,ntrie%D $ollo2ing le%% de-ocratic and -ore in+,i%itorial C,%tice %y%te-%D )ave e7panded t)eir la2% o$ privilege beyond o,r%""to cover $a-ilie%D $or e7a-ple. It -ay be vie2ed a% i-practical to )ave ad )oc r,le%D b,t arg,ably po%t )o r,le% are C,%t a% obCectionable.
PE#SONAL A2TONO3$ AND DI"NIT$ DO NOT >2STIF$ P#I%ILE"E Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6&*"1 Ab%ol,te con$identiality can en)ance la2yer client relation%. It o$ten -a3e% t)e client $eel a% i$ t)e la2yer i% a tr,e
$id,ciaryD 2it) loyalty to no one ot)er t)an t)e client. It al%o avoid% t)e ,n%ee-ly %it,ation in 2)ic) a la2yer ind,ce% t)e client to be open and t)en in$or-% on t)e client. 8,t t)e%e con%ideration% alone do not C,%ti$y t)e %tricte%t o$ r,le% . In an ideal 2orldD t)e govern-ent 2o,ld
pro-ote t)e relation%)ip bet2een client% and all agent%. 8,t t)at doe% not -ean it i% e%%ential to pre%erve con$identiality to an e7tre-e degree. Even i$ 2e accept client !a,tono-y! a% an i-portant val,eD t)ere are li-it% to )o2 co-$ortable 2e 2ant client% to be in t)e belie$ t)at t)eir la2yer% 2ill never ta3e a %tand again%t t)e-. Arg,ablyD client di%tr,%t 2ill increa%e i$ t)e la2yer in%i%t% t)at %)e 2ill al2ay% act in accord 2it) t)e client<% 2i%)e%.
So long a% t)e attorney in$or-% t)e client at t)e o,t%et o$ t)e relation%)ip t)at %)e -ay $eel co-pelled to di%clo%e partic,lar type% o$ in$or-ationD %,b%e+,ent di%clo%,re% are not ,n%ee-ly. T)e client -ay -ore readily accept )er a% an ally 2it)in t)e de$ined bo,ndarie%D bot) beca,%e t)e la2yer )a% e7)ibited integrity and beca,%e t)e li-itation% on t)e alliance -a3e t)e total pac3age -ore believable. T)e arg,-ent t)at con$identiality give% !appropriate regard! to client dignity i% e+,ally v,lnerable . For oneD t)e %a-e arg,-ent applie% to all pro$e%%ion%. /ore i-portantlyD too -,c) %ecrecy can be co,nter"prod,ctive. A% t)e S,pre-e Co,rt i-plicitly recogniBed in approving a la2yer<% t)reat to di%clo%e a client<% propo%ed perC,ryD t)e la2yer 2)o
contrib,te% to t)e notion t)at t)e client can get a2ay 2it) anyt)ing de-ean% t)e client a% a -oral individ,al.
45
Attorney-Client Privilege Fail!, Incon!i!tently Applied

NO CONSISTENT "ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E" NOW T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. &5 T)e attorney"client privilege i% a -e%%. One -ig)t e7pect a $e2 ,nre%olved i%%,e% beca,%e t)ere i% no national la2 governing t)e privilegeD no codi$ication o$ t)e privilege in t)e $ederal co,rt%D and little leader%)ip $ro- t)e S,pre-e Co,rt on t)e %,bCect. Jet t)e con$lict and con$,%ion r,n% deeper and i% -ore 2ide%pread t)an -any ob%erver% realiBe. @nli3e -o%t ot)er area% o$ t)e la2 o$ evidenceD t)ere i% a lac3 o$ convergence in 3ey a%pect% o$ t)e attorney"client privilege. T)e la2 o$ privilege varie% greatly $ro- %tate to %tateD $ederal circ,it to $ederal circ,itD and conte7t to conte7tD and it% application o$ten i% ,nclear 2it)in partic,lar C,ri%diction% and even 2it)in partic,lar ca%e%. /o%t %tri3inglyD t)e con$lict% and a-big,itie% are not relegated to t)e -argin% .
F,nda-ental i%%,e%D %,c) a% t)e re+,ire-ent% o$ con$identialityD t)e para-eter% o$ t)e corporate attorney"client privilegeD and t)e %cope o$ t)e cri-e"$ra,d e7e-ption are di%p,ted or largely ,nre%olved. /oreoverD c)oice"o$"la2 principle% governing t)e
c)oice bet2een con$licting privilege doctrine% o$ intere%ted C,ri%diction% %i-ply e7acerbate t)e ,npredictability beca,%e t)e%e principle% vary 2idely and o$ten de$a,lt to application o$ t)e la2 o$ t)e $or,-. C2##ENT ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E -I"-L$ 2NCE#TAIN T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. . "* In order $or privilege protection% to be rea%onably certain to a co-petent attorney loo3ing $or2ard $ro- t)e ti-e o$ t)e co--,nicationD t)e protection% -,%t %ati%$y at lea%t t)ree condition%. Fir%tD t)e %cope o$ t)e protection t)at t)e privilege a$$ord% -,%t be clear' con$,%ingD a-big,o,%D or $le7ible privilege %tandard% do not o$$er predictable protection. SecondD rea%onably certain protection% -,%t be generally " or at lea%t predictably " applicable. T)e attorney -,%t )ave con$idence t)at protection% 2ill apply regardle%% o$ t)e $or,- " %tateD $ederalD or nonC,dicial " and t)e nat,re o$ t)e proceeding or %,b%tantive clai-% t)at ,lti-ately give ri%e to a%%ertion o$ t)e protection%. FinallyD privilege protection% re-ain 2)olly ,ncertain i$ t)ey are +,ali$ied or ot)er2i%e %,bCect to po%t )oc abandon-ent or revocation. T)e c,rrent privilege regi-e $ail% to %ati%$y eac) o$ t)e%e condition% in -any circ,-%tance%. T)ere i% a %,b%tantial a-o,nt o$ con$,%ion over a n,-ber o$ $,nda-ental a%pect% o$ t)e attorney"client privilege . IndeedD t)ere are n,-ero,%D lingering a-big,itie% and ,nre%olved doctrinal i%%,e% 2it)in partic,lar C,ri%diction%. In additionD t)ere i% no g,arantee t)at t)e privilege protection% a$$orded in one C,ri%dictionD $or,-D or type o$ proceeding 2ill apply in anot)er. To t)e contraryD t)ere i% no generally applicable %et o$ privilege r,le% andD per)ap% %,rpri%inglyD li-ited convergence on 3ey a%pect% o$ attorney"client privilege doctrine. T)e%e %igni$icant inter"C,ri%dictional con$lict% in t)e la2D co-bined 2it) varying and o$ten ,npredictable governing c)oice"o$"la2 principle%D re%,lt in ,ncertain protection%. /oreoverD -odern b,%ine%%D
litigationD and con$lict re%ol,tion practice% -a3e it increa%ingly di$$ic,lt $or an attorney to predictD at t)e ti-e o$ a co--,nicationD 2)et)er t)e allegedly privileged %tat,% o$ t)e co--,nication 2ill be c)allenged in a partic,lar %tate or $ederal co,rtD in a proceeding governed by %tate or $ederal privilege la2D or in a nonC,dicial $or,-D %,c) a% arbitralD reg,latoryD or congre%%ional proceeding%. FinallyD in -any circ,-%tance%D privilege protection% are tentative or +,ali$ied ' %,b%tantive privilege doctrine %o-eti-e% allo2% deci%ion -a3er% to overrideD abrogateD or ignore privilege protection% D 2)ile at ot)er ti-e%D attorney% or t)eir client% 2aive t)e privilege per-anently by invol,ntary di%clo%,re or by %t,-bling into one o$ t)e trap% $or t)e ,n2ary l,r3ing belo2 t)e %,r$ace o$ apparent protection. T),%D t)e protection% t)at t)e -odern privilege a$$ord% o$ten are ,ncertain . T)e %tory o$ t)e ,ncertainty in today<% privilege -o%t appropriately begin% in t)e early 41*5%D 2)en Congre%% )ad a real opport,nity to provide national leader%)ip on privilege doctrine b,t c)o%e not to act. Congre%% )ad it% rea%on% $or not ta3ing t)e lead a +,arter cent,ry agoD b,tD in )ind%ig)tD it% inaction ,lti-ately 2a% a -aCor ca,%e $or t)e c,rrentD intolerable %tate o$ privilege doctrine. Since t)enD contin,ing
di%agree-ent% a-ong %tate and $ederal C,ri%diction%D C,dicial inattentionD $la2ed C,dicial policy -a3ingD and c)anging econo-icD litigationD and di%p,te re%ol,tion practice% )ave contrib,ted to t)e proble-. T#E3ENDO2S 2NCE#TAINT$ AND CONF2SION IN APPL$IN" P#I%ILE"E AND ITS E9CEPTIONS T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. 1."1 Intra"and inter"C,ri%dictional con$lict% and con$,%ion in t)e la2 o$ t)e attorney"client privilege are ra-pant . IndeedD it 2o,ld be i-po%%ible to di%c,%% all o$ t)e 2ay% in 2)ic) privilege la2 i% ,nre%olved or di%p,ted in t)e co,rt%. :o2everD by $oc,%ing on a $e2 area% o$ a-big,ity and di%agree-entD I )ope to de-on%trate t)e dept) and %cope o$ t)e proble-. T)e area% o$ con$,%ion and di%p,te $all into t)ree general categorie%' G4H t)e ba%ic ele-ent% o$ t)e
44
privilegeI G;H t)e cri-e"$ra,d e7ceptionI and G6H t)e 2ay% in 2)ic) t)e privilege protection% -ay be 2aivedD abandonedD or ignored. Alt)o,g) -o%t o$ t)e di%c,%%ion $oc,%e% on inter"C,ri%dictional con$lict%D -any C,ri%diction% )ave not re%olved t)e%e i%%,e% internally. IndeedD t)e $oregoing revie2 o$ t)e S,pre-e Co,rt<% privilege deci%ion% %)o2% )o2 $e2 i%%,e% )ave been re%olved de$initively in t)e $ederal %y%te-. /ore generallyD t)e%e i%%,e% receive li-ited appellate attention beca,%e privilege deter-ination% ,%,ally occ,r at t)e di%covery %tage o$ litigationD and )ence are interloc,tory. T),%D in -o%t $ederal circ,it% and -o%t %tate co,rt %y%te-%D privilege deter-ination% are rarely %,bCect to i--ediate appeal. In additionD ,nle%% privilege deci%ion% are appealed i--ediatelyD t)ey are li3ely to evade appellate revie2 beca,%e -o%t ca%e% are re%olved be$ore $inal C,dg-entD and i$ notD %o-e privilege i%%,e% -ay be -ooted once !t)e cat i% o,t o$ t)e bag.!
De$initive appellate re%ol,tion o$ lingering controver%ie%D t)ere$oreD i% o$ten el,%ive.
S2)STANTIAL 2NCE#TAINT$ A)O2T W-EN P#I%ILE"E APPLIES -- SIN"LE W#ON" CALL CAN DEST#O$ IT T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. 4;1"64
Once t)e t)ree previo,% %,b%ection% are con%idered toget)erD t)e largely ,ncertain and ,npredictable nat,re o$ t)e attorney"client privilege e-erge%. T)ere i% little S,pre-e Co,rt leader%)ip on privilege doctrineD %igni$icant inter"and intra"
C,ri%dictional ,ncertaintie% and con$,%ion in %,b%tantive privilege doctrineD and di$$ering and ,nreliable c)oice"o$"privilege"la2 principle%. T)e con$lict% and con$,%ion in privilege doctrine are not relegated to t)e o,ter edge%I rat)erD -any o$ t)e di%p,te% addre%% i%%,e% lying at t)e )eart o$ t)e protection . In additionD it i% beco-ing )arder $or attorney% and client% to predict at t)e ti-e o$ t)e co--,nication t)e $ora " C,dicial or ot)er2i%e " in 2)ic) client% ,lti-ately -ay %ee3 privilege protection. And it get% 2or%e. T)e ,ncertainty i% -agni$ied by t)e $act t)atD once allegedly privileged co--,nication% are revealedD t)ey -ay lo%e t)e bene$it o$ t)e privilegeD even i$ t)e co,rt<% deci%ion to co-pel di%clo%,re in t)e $ir%t proceeding 2a% erroneo,% or t)e protection a$$orded by t)e original $or,- i% 2ea3er t)an protection% available in ot)er $ora. To ill,%trateD 2)en a party a%%ert% t)e privilege ,n%,cce%%$,llyD t)e a%%erting party -,%t
di%clo%e t)o%e co--,nication% to t)e adver%e party. At t)at pointD t)e co--,nication% are no longer con$idential. A% a $or-al -atterD t)i% occ,rrence call% into +,e%tion 2)et)er t)e party -ay a%%ert in later proceeding% t)at t)e co--,nication% are con$identialD partic,larly i$ t)e content i% available to t)e p,blic. So-e co,rt% )ave )eld t)at partie% can no longer claiprivilege i$D a% a practical -atterD t)ird partie% or t)e p,blic 3no2 o$ t)e allegedly privileged co--,nication%. /oreoverD even i$ a party<% legal rig)t to claiprivilege i% not lo%t ,pon co-pelled di%clo%,reD t)e cat i% o,t o$ t)e bag' t)e con$idence% are no longer %ecretD andD in co-ple7 litigationD adver%arie% in later proceeding% -ay )ave gained t)e bene$it o$ 3no2ing %,c) con$idence% 2)et)er or not t)o%e co--,nication% 2ill be ad-i%%ible at trial. T),%D a %ingle C,dgeD ad-ini%trative la2 C,dgeD arbitratorD co--i%%ionerD
or legi%lator -ay de%troy privilege protection% per-anently. T)i% i% partic,larly tro,bling given t)at erroneo,% privilege deci%ion% are -ore li3ely 2)ile privilege la2 re-ain% ,nclear. INCONSISTENT NAT2#E OF P#I%ILE"E P#ECL2DES >2STICE AD%ANTA"ES T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. &;
So-e are content to let partie% and co,rt% contin,e to )a%) o,t privilege doctrine on a ca%e"by"ca%eD C,ri%diction"by"C,ri%diction ba%i%. T)at i% 2)at Congre%% did in 41* D 2)en it c)o%e to leave t)e develop-ent o$ privilege doctrine to t)e co,rt%. Contin,ing on t)i% co,r%e -a3e% no %en%eD )o2ever. Fir%tD re"litigating t)e para-eter% o$ privilege doctrine over and over again create% enor-o,% tran%action co%t%. /ore i-portantlyD t)e ,ncertainty t)at t)i% approac) )a% prod,ced de$ie% t)e principal
C,%ti$ication $or t)e -odern privilege. 8y %)ielding attorney"client con$idence% $rodi%coveryD t)e privilege i% %,ppo%ed to pro-ote co--,nication and candor bet2een t)e attorney and clientD 2)ic)D in t,rnD i% %,ppo%ed to $o%ter co-pliance 2it) t)e la2D $acilitate t)e e$$ective ad-ini%tration o$ C,%ticeD and prod,ce ot)er %ocial bene$it%. S,$$icient certainty or predictability t)at t)e%e con$idence% 2ill be protected $rodi%clo%,re i% e%%ential to pro-oteD and avoid c)illingD client candor. IndeedD an ,ncertain privilege o$$er% not)ing b,t )ar-' it in)ibit% acce%% to t)e tr,t) and create% enor-o,% tran%action co%t% 2)ile $ailing to en)ance attorney"client co--,nication and candor. T),%D today<% )ig)ly ,ncertain privilege i% intolerable. CE#TAINT$ IN ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E P#OTECTION %ITAL TO FOSTE#IN" OPEN CO332NICATION T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. *6" T)e ,tilitarian C,%ti$ication $or t)e attorney"client privilege i% pre-i%ed on t)e a%%,-ption t)at providing protection $or attorney"client con$idence% 2ill en)ance client candor orD at a -ini-,-D $o%ter greater attorney"client co--,nication. Alt)o,g) -o%t co,rt%D practitioner%D and co--entator% accept t)i% a%%,-ption o,trig)tD it i% bot) di%p,ted and e-pirically ,nveri$ied. S3eptic% t)ere$ore re-ainD even t)o,g) -o%t a%pect% o$ t)e -odern

privilege " incl,ding t)e corporate privilege " are al-o%t certainly )ere to %tay.
4;
De%pite t)e lingering controver%yD t)e privilege cannot en)ance candor or co--,nication i$ t)e protection it a$$ord% i% ,ncertain. T),%D $or %ociety to reap bene$it% $ro- t)e privilegeD it -,%t a$$ord %,$$iciently certain protection $or attorney"client co--,nication%. To pro-ote greater candor and co--,nicationD privilege protection -,%t re-ove t)e di%incentive% $or client% to %pea3 $reely 2it) t)eir attorney% . Ad)erent% to t)e ,tilitarian C,%ti$ication o$ t)e attorney"client privilege rely on
t)e !co--on %en%e! notion t)at client% 2o,ld be ,n2illingD or at lea%t $ar -ore )e%itantD to di%c,%% e-barra%%ingD ,nplea%antD and ot)er2i%e )ar-$,l -atter% in detail 2it) t)eir attorney% i$ %,c) di%c,%%ion% co,ld be ,%ed again%t t)e client in a pending or later proceeding. /oreoverD attorney% 2o,ld be rel,ctant to %ee3 or allo2 $,ll di%clo%,re $ro- client% i$ %,c) di%clo%,re% ,lti-ately co,ld )ar- t)e client%< intere%t%. T)i% greater 2illingne%% on t)e part o$ client% and attorney% to engage in $,ll and $ran3 co--,nication%
depend% ,pon t)eir belie$ t)at t)e co--,nication% 2ill be protected. I$ eit)er client or attorney )a% %igni$icant do,bt% abo,t t)e co--,nication<% protected %tat,%D eac) per%on 2ill be le%% 2illing to engage in t)e interc)ange. T),%D in order to en)ance co--,nication%D t)e privilege -,%t provide protection t)at i% %,$$iciently certain to allay client and attorney concern% regarding $,t,re di%clo%,re .
Co,rt% and co--entator% ad)ering to t)e vie2 t)at t)e privilege pro-ote% attorney"client candor and co--,nication are virt,ally ,nani-o,% in agree-ent on t)e need $or a concrete privilege. IndeedD t)e S,pre-e Co,rt pre-i%ed it% deci%ion in @pCo)n largely on t)e need $or a predictable and certain privilege'
I$ t)e p,rpo%e o$ t)e attorney"client privilege i% to be %ervedD t)e attorney and client -,%t be able to predict 2it) %o-e degree o$ certainty 2)et)er partic,lar di%c,%%ion% 2ill be protected. An ,ncertain privilege D or one 2)ic) p,rport% to be certain b,t re%,lt% in 2idely varying application% by t)e co,rt%D i% little better t)an no privilege at all.
46
Attorney-Client Privilege Fail!, Doe! Not Deter 3i!cond1ct

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E DOES NOT DETE# 3ISCOND2CT Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6&1"*5 T)e -o%t appealing %econdary C,%ti$ication $or attorney"client con$identiality i% t)at )elping la2yer% obtain in$or-ation enable% t)e- to advi%e client% again%t co--itting i-proper act% or $iling $rivolo,% clai-%. Jet t)e %a-e e-pirical +,e%tion% t)at plag,e t)e %y%te-ic C,%ti$ication $or %trict con$identiality are pre%ent )ere. Con$identiality probably doe% allo2 %o-e la2yer% to prevent %o-e -i%cond,ct be$ore it occ,r%. 8,t adding li-ited e7ception% -ig)t not %,b%tantially a$$ect la2yer%< ability to di%%,ade i-proper act%. /oreoverD it i% ,nclear t)at %trict con$identiality i% 2)at provo3e% client candor abo,t potential i-proprietie% .
In -o%t ca%e%D la2yer% i-pre%% ,pon client% t)e i-portance o$ $,ll di%clo%,re to t)e la2yer<% ability to eval,ate t)e ca%e. T)i% 2arning alone -ay proc,re t)e type o$ in$or-ation la2yer% need to prevent -i%cond,ct. A% a $act,al -atterD t)e additional di%clo%,re% %trict con$identiality $o%ter% -ay only -arginally i-prove t)e la2yer<% ability to en$orce t)e la2.
Enabling client% to di%c,%% planned -i%cond,ct 2it) i-p,nity %o-eti-e% -ig)t even pro-ote -i%cond,ct. In con%,lting 2it) client%D la2yer% o$ten %erve t)e $,nction o$ p%yc)iatri%tD %ocial 2or3erD or prie%t"con$e%%or. T)ey provide %o-e client% 2it) a p%yc)ological o,tlet t)at )elp% t)e client% per%i%t in -i%cond,ct. E-pirical re%earc) -ig)t %)o2 t)at la2yer% play t)i% role only rarelyD t)at t)e ri%3 o$ pro-oting -i%cond,ct de%erve% little 2eig)t. Jet proponent% o$ t)e di%%,ading -i%cond,ct rationale )ave not relied on %,c) evidenceI t)ey do not
even con%ider %trict con$identiality<% po%%ible co%t%.
44
Attorney-Client Privilege )ad, Serve! t(e Need! o t(e Po4er 1l

P#I%ILE"E P#OTECTS T-E ELITE -- ANTI-DE3OC#ATIC (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;6; Privileged co--,nication% )ave )i%torically been a privilege o$ privileged gro,p% " la2yer%D doctor%D t)e c),rc)D t)e %tate. T)o%e gro,p%< -e-ber% %)o,ld be governed by t)eir o2n r,le%D b,t t)o%e r,le% %)o,ld not nece%%arily ta3e precedence in C,dicial proceeding% or 2)en p,blic danger% co,ld be prevented . T)e very 2ord privilege connote% an ,nde-ocratic pre$erence t)at i% incon%i%tent 2it) A-erican val,e% in t)e t2enty" $ir%t cent,ry and i% at 2ar 2it) t)e %earc) $or tr,t). Po2er$,l in%tit,tion%""t)e c),rc)D t)e %tateD pro$e%%ion% "" along 2it)
ot)er in%tit,tion% %)o,ld be enco,raged to pro-,lgate r,le% and $ollo2 practice% t)at enco,rage and protect con$identialityD b,t to ret)in3 t)e i%%,e o$ privilege.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E DESI"NED TO P#OTECT T-E POSITION OF T-E POWE#F2L -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' I. Introd,ction' T)e Develop-ent o$ Evidentiary Privilege% in A-erican #a2D! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 4416"4
Po2er T)eory a% E7planation. "" T)e po2er t)eory conde-n% bot) t)e traditional C,%ti$ication and t)e privacy rationale a% inco)erent rationaliBation% $or an inco)erent body o$ la2. It a%%ert% in%tead t)at t)e real root% o$ privilege la2 lie in t)e po2er o$ t)o%e bene$iting $ro- it. In it% %i-ple%t $or-D t)e po2er t)eory %ee3% not to C,%ti$y privilege%D b,t to e7plain 2)y t)ey e7i%t 2)en %o $e2D i$ anyD are C,%ti$iable. It e7plain% privilege la2 not a% an e$$ort to enco,rage co--,nication% or to protect privacyD b,t a% %pecial treat-ent 2on by t)e po2er o$ t)o%e privileged . De%pite t)e radical overtone% o$ t)e po2er t)eoryD -any -ain%trea- co--entator% )ave ac3no2ledged t)e role o$ political po2er in t)e develop-ent o$ privilege la2. IndeedD 2)at -ay be t)e -o%t %tri3ing $eat,re o$ privilege la2 i% t)e tran%parency o$ t)e connection bet2een legal doctrine and political in$l,ence. T)e very 2ord !privilege! %,gge%t% t)e protection o$ a $avored elite. In $actD early Engli%) co,rt% e7plicitly li-ited privilege% to t)e ,pper cla%%e%.
T)o%e enCoying privilege% today con%tit,te %o-e o$ t)e -o%t politically po2er$,l pro$e%%ion% and in%tit,tion% in A-erica' la2yer%D doctor%D t)e C),rc)D t)e ne2% -ediaD and t)e govern-ent . IndeedD bot) conte-porary and )i%torical circ,-%tance% %,rro,nding t)e -a3ing o$ privilege la2 %,gge%t a po2er ba%i%.
T)e va%t -aCority o$ ne2 privilege% )ave been created by %tat,teD a proce%% t)at certainly re+,ire% t)e e7erci%e o$ political po2er. Congre%% vetoed t)e %ection o$ t)e Propo%ed Federal (,le% o$ EvidenceD t)at 2o,ld )ave con%tricted or aboli%)ed -o%t privilege%D -ainly beca,%e o$ t)e inten%e lobbying o$ protected gro,p%D de%pite t)e $act t)at t)e Propo%ed (,le% 2ere intended to -a3e privilege la2 con$or- to t)e traditional C,%ti$ication.
P#I%ILE"E IS A CONCESSION TO POWE# AND ELITIS3 (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;; So-e critic% )ave clai-ed t)at t)e very notion o$ privilege i% a conce%%ion to po2er and eliti%-. An a,t)oritative and irreverent treati%e advi%ed t)at privilege i% C,%t t)at""it give% certain cla%%e% o$ people t)e %pecial rig)t to re$,%e to re%pond to legiti-ate govern-ent trib,nal% per$or-ing t)eir proper $,nction%D in order to protect t)eir client%< %ecret%. For 2or3ing"cla%% $ol3% ,nable to a$$ord t)e attention% o$ t)o%e pro$e%%ional%D !t)e poor -an<% only privilege i% perC,ry.! T)e -o%t de-ocratic r,leD it )a% been %,gge%tedD i% t)at no per%on %)o,ld )ave t)e rig)t to re$,%e to te%ti$y on t)e ba%i% o$ privilege. Anot)er treati%e concl,ded t)at !privilege% give real or $ancy %)elter or pre%tige to %pecial gro,p% o$ people .! T),%D t)e )oi polloi 2)o go to %tore$ront ta7 preparer% beca,%e t)ey cannot a$$ord acco,ntant% or attorney%D or t)e poor per%on 2it) e-otional proble-% 2)o %ee3% lay a%%i%tance beca,%e )e cannot a$$ord a p%yc)iatri%tD are not protected i$ t)eir )elper%< te%ti-ony i% %o,g)t. Nor i% t)e $ollo2er o$ an ,nort)odo7 or ,nrecogniBed religio,% gro,p
protected 2it) t)e %y-pat)etic ,nder%tanding provided to e%tabli%)ed c),rc)e%. T)e allocation o$ privilege% !tend% to $ollo2 t)e di%trib,tion o$ political po2er in conte-porary %ocietyD! one co--entator noted. !Po2er$,l in%tit,tion%! get t)e privilege
and t)eir client% are t)e bene$iciarie%. #E>ECTIN" OF T-E P#I%AC$ #ATIONALE DE3ONST#ATES T-AT P#I%ILE"E IS #EALL$ A)O2T P#OTECTIN" T-E POWE#F2L -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' I. Introd,ction' T)e Develop-ent o$ Evidentiary Privilege% in A-erican #a2D! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 441
One can per)ap% $ind -ore %,btle %,pport $or t)e po2er t)eory by analyBing t)e evol,tion o$ privilege C,%ti$ication%. :i%toricallyD co,rt%D acting on t)e t)eory t)at t)e la2 %)o,ld re%pect t)e )onorable obligation% o$ gentle-enD o$ten accorded de$erence to any gentle-an 2)o )ad pro-i%ed con$identiality. T)e de-i%e o$ t)i%
)i%torical C,%ti$ication can arg,ably be lin3ed to t)e increa%ing i-portance o$ egalitariani%- a% a political $orce. T)e traditional C,%ti$icationD 2)ic) bot) reCected and replaced t)e )i%torical C,%ti$icationD -ig)t t)en be be%t ,nder%tood a% a reaction again%t a rationale t)at %tar3ly relied on %tat,% and po2er a% -ean% o$ di%ting,i%)ing t)e legally privileged $ro- t)e legally non"privileged.
8y denying t)e relevance o$ any individ,al intere%tD 2)ic) -ig)t vary -ore obvio,%ly 2it) t)e po2er o$ t)at individ,alD and appealing %olely to %ocial policyD t)e traditional C,%ti$ication tended to ob$,%cate t)e in$l,ence o$ po2er on privilege la2. T)e %a-e p)eno-enon -ig)t e7plain C,dicial rel,ctance to adopt a privacy rationale. #i-iting privilege% to partic,lar relation% ,nder t)e privacy rationale 2o,ld re+,ire -a3ing nor-ative di%tinction% bet2een t)e relative need% or de%ert% o$ vario,% gro,p%D di%tinction% t)at 2o,ld )ave -ore evident political contentD and t),% be -ore delegiti-atingD t)an t)e !p,blic policy! di%tinction% -ade ,nder t)e traditional C,%ti$ication. P#I%ILE"E #2LES P#OTECT T-E #IC8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. 45
T)e ,nderlying p,blic intere%t 2a% cogently e7pre%%ed by Sir =ordon S#ynn in M() *urope +td v *uropean #ommissionD in a pa%%age cited 2it) approval by #ord Scott and #ord Car%2ell in Three Rivers ,. T)e Advocate"=eneral %tated t)at t)e privilege' !...%pring% e%%entially $ro- t)e ba%ic need o$ a -an in a civiliBed %ociety to be able to t,rn to )i% la2yer $or advice and )elpD and i$ proceeding% beginD $or repre%entationI it %pring% no le%% $ro- t)e advantage% to a %ociety
2)ic) evolve% co-ple7 la2 reac)ing into all t)e b,%ine%% a$$air% o$ per%on%D real and legalD t)at t)ey %)o,ld be able to 3no2 2)at t)ey can do ,nder t)e la2D 2)at i% $orbiddenD 2)ere t)ey -,%t tread circ,-%pectlyD 2)ere t)ey r,n ri%3%. !
4&
Attorney-Client Privilege )ad, Serve! t(e Need! o t(e Attorney

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E 3AINL$ A)O2T P#I%ILE"IN" T-E POSITION OF T-E ATTO#NE$ T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 441";5 Anot)er e7a-ple o$ t)e 2ay in 2)ic) t)e p,blic tr,%t in la2yer% i% %)a3en by t)e %tig-a o$ i--oral C,%tice i% $o,nd in t)e area o$ t)e attorney"client privilege. T)i% piety o$ t)e pro$e%%ion "" t)at con$idence% are privileged and cannot be revealed "" i% an ,nc)allenged et)ical re+,ire-ent a-ong la2yer% D ,nco-pro-i%ing
and %acro%anctD an ab%ol,te d,ty o2ed by an attorney to )i% client. 8,t in $ait)$,lly carrying o,t t)i% d,tyD la2yer% D in e%%enceD beco-e %ecret 3eeper%D t)eir client%< con$idence% %ec,redD eac) re%ting on top o$ one anot)er. In t)e la2yer<% -indD t)e privilege i% an e%%ential %ervice t)ey provideI it<%
2)at -a3e% t)e- %pecial.

In &leak -ouseD T,l3ing)ornD t)e attorney 2)o repre%ent% Sir #eice%ter and )arbor% t)e dar3 %ecret o$ )i% client<% 2i$e #ady Dedloc3D i% re$erred to t)ro,g)o,t t)e novel a% a bloodle%%D calc,latingD %ini%tter %ecret"3eeper. :e<% good at )i% CobD b,t everyone 2ince% 2)en )e enter% a roo-. #a2yer% -aintain t)at t)e attorney"client privilege i% nece%%ary. It en%,re% t)at t)ey are
$,lly in$or-ed o$ everyt)ing relevant to t)eir client<% ca%eD 2)ic) in t,rnD enable% t)e- to a%%e-ble t)e be%t legal %trategy. And la2yer%D beca,%e t)ey are e-otionally detac)ed and obCective pro$e%%ional%D in%i%t t)at t)e%e con$idence% are critical only $or repre%entation p,rpo%e%. T)ey clai- to )ave no per%onal inve%t-ent in 3no2ing a client<% private b,%ine%%. Jet Dic3en% i% not %o %,re. T,l3ing)ornD $or in%tanceD i% depicted a% a -an 2)o enCoy% 3no2ing t)e inti-ate detail% o$ a good %ecret. :e gat)er% t)e- ,p $or )i% o2n a-,%e-entD and $or ,%e a% po%%ible leverage again%t )i% client% or ot)er%. T)e privilege -ayD t)ere$oreD tr,ly be t)e la2yer<% privilege to e7erci%eD c,nningly gat)ered 2it) t)e preten%e o$ pro$e%%ional d,tyD b,tD li3e T,l3ing)ornD retained and -anip,lated 2it) %)eer gleeD )ardly $orgotten at t)e end o$ t)e
b,%ine%% day.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E #2LES OPE#ATE TO P#OTECT ECONO3IC INTE#ESTS OF ATTO#NE$S Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6 1"&4 Con$identiality r,le% al%o -ay bene$it an attorney $inancially. For e7a-ple'
A ta7 la2yer learn%D $ro- 2or3ing 2it) t)e boo3% o$ a clientD t)at t)e client )a% received large %,-% $ro- t)e (,%%ian govern-ent. T)e client 2ill only %ay t)at t)e -oney i% inco-e $or %ervice% rendered. T)e la2yer 3no2% t)at t)e client )a% acce%% to cla%%i$ied govern-ent doc,-ent%.
A la2yer $orbidden to di%clo%e need not $ear reperc,%%ion% i$ )er a$$iliation 2it) t)e client<% action% later beco-e% p,blic. W)en +,e%tioned abo,t t)e propriety o$ a%%i%ting t)e clientD t)e attorney can )ide be)ind t)e nondi%clo%,re r,le%. A %-ile or !no co--entD! %,gge%ting t)at t)e +,e%tioner 2o,ld act li3e t)e la2yer !i$ )e only 3ne2D! enable% t)e attorney to avoid t)e co%t o$ bad p,blicity and co--,nity di%approval o$ )er cond,ct. In contra%tD 2)en %ilence %,bCect% la2yer% to acc,%ation% o$ 2rongdoingD -o%t code% a,t)oriBe la2yer% to %pea3. Strict con$identiality provi%ion% pro-ote and rein$orce A-erican %ociety<% perception o$ la2yer% a% )ired g,n%. P,blic acceptance o$ t)e )ired g,n -odel enable% t)e la2yer% in t)e )ypot)etical ca%e% to ta3e on Gand accept pay-ent $orH di%ta%te$,l ca%e%. IndeedD t)e pre%ence o$ con$identiality -ay e7plain 2)y client% are 2illing to pay )ig) $ee% to la2yer% 2)en non"la2yer% -ig)t be able to provide %i-ilar %ervice% -ore c)eaply. T)e e7tent to 2)ic) t)e pro$e%%ion<% per%onal or econo-ic intere%t% )ave in$l,enced t)e %cope o$ con$identiality r,le% can never be 3no2n. Jet t)eir -ere e7i%tence lead% one to 2onder 2)et)er t)e attorney"dra$ter% o$ t)e %trict code% "" per)ap% even ,nintentionally "" )ave overe-p)a%iBed t)e %y%te-ic C,%ti$ication% $or con$identiality or ,nderval,ed t)e %ocial bene$it% o$ le%% re%trictive r,le% . A code t)at e7plicitly ac3no2ledge% la2yer%< rig)t to $ollo2
t)eir o2n -oral in%tinct% de%pite a $inancial ri%3 -ig)t prod,ce a -ore et)ical bar t)at can %erve %ociety better. T)e $ollo2ing %ection% t),% eval,ate t)e %trengt) o$ t)e traditional C,%ti$ication% $or %trict con$identiality and t)e %ocietal co%t% o$ avoiding e7ception%.
E9CEPTIONS TO ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E SE#%E T-E INTE#ESTS OF LAW$E#S W-ILE I"NO#IN" 2N>2ST O2TCO3ES (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. .4 T)e p,blic p,rpo%e% be)ind t)e attorney"client privilege are 2i%e and rea%onable. Jet t)ere are ,nder%tandableD i$ %el$"%ervingD e7ception% to t)e con$identiality r,le t)at allo2 attorney% to reveal client
4*
co--,nication% in -alpractice ca%e% again%t t)e- or in $ee di%p,te% . For e7a-pleD t)e trial attorney $or t)e terrori%t Ti-ot)y /c0eig) 2a% allo2ed to di%clo%e con$idential co--,nication% 2)enD in appealing )i% ca%eD /c0eig) acc,%ed )i- o$ providing an inco-petent de$en%e /ig)t t)ere not be $,rt)erD e+,ally rationalD e7ception%. One cynic concl,ded t)at t)i% e7ception to t)e attorney"client privilege reveal% a )ypocri%y' !Con$identiality -ean% everyt)ing in legal et)ic% ,nle%% la2yer% lo%e -oneyD in 2)ic) ca%e it -ean% not)ing. ! T),%D con$identiality i% not en$orced in a $ee di%p,teD or in a co-plaint again%t an attorney by )i% clientD b,t it doe% prevent an attorney $ro- e7onerating an innocent de$endant or $inding a -i%%ing per%on. Attorney% pro-ote !needle%% %ecrecyD! one critic arg,edD beca,%e con$identiality p,t% a pre-i,- on %ervice% t)ey are ,ni+,ely +,ali$ied to provide. T)i% in),-ane in%tinct i% !a -ar3eting %trategyD -ore t)an an ideologyD in )i% critical C,dg-ent.
4.
AT, "Attorney-Client Privilege Critical A!pect o Pro e!!ional Et(ic!"

CO33IT3ENT TO ST#ICT CONFIDENTIALIT$ CO3P#O3ISES ET-ICS OF ATTO#NE$S Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6 6 W)atever it% bene$it%D )o2everD %trict con$identiality al%o )a% adver%e e$$ect%. In$le7ibility in t)e r,le% )a% prod,ced pec,liaritie% in t)e la2 governing client %ecret%. /ore i-portantD t)e tradition o$ %trict con$identiality )a% )elped teac) la2yer% and client% to rationaliBe a-oral repre%entation . #a2yer% -,%t clo%e t)eir eye% to in$or-ation t)at -ig)t prevent )ar- to ot)er% or t)at violate% t)e la2yer%< o2n et)ical and political belie$% . (,le% enco,raging t)i% per%ona inevitably a$$ect la2yer%< individ,ality and de%ire to con%ider et)ic% in ot)er a%pect% o$ t)eir practice. FAIL2#E TO >2STIF$ NECESSIT$ FO# ST#ICT CONFIDENTIALIT$ 2NDE#3INES #ESPECT FO# P#OFESSIONAL ET-ICS CODE Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6 6"4 E-inent co--entator% t),% )ave called $or e-pirical re%earc) te%ting t)e bene$it% o$ %trict con$identiality and t)e validity o$ it% C,%ti$ication%. T)e acade-ic co--,nity )a%D )o2everD ,ni$or-ly ignored t)e call. T)e %c)olarly inaction %te-%D per)ap%D $ro- a !$eeling! t)at t)e i%%,e% are -ore t)eoretical t)an real. For la2yer% only rarely )ave to c)oo%e bet2een breac)ing a pro$e%%ional code and -aintaining a -orally +,e%tionable %ilence . T)ro,g) per%,a%ionD
re$,%al to ,nderta3e repre%entationD or t)reat% o$ 2it)dra2alD la2yer% o$ten can convince client% to vol,nteer %en%itive in$or-ation.
T)e deart) o$ reported c)allenge% to t)e application o$ con$identiality provi%ion% %,gge%t% t)at di%ciplinary co--ittee% -ay overloo3 2ell"intended violation% o$ t)e letter o$ t)e r,le%. Nevert)ele%%D concrete %it,ation% e7i%t in 2)ic) %trict con$identiality -ay con$lict 2it) %ociety<% intere%t% . Acade-ia<% re$,%al to +,e%tion and te%t t)e operation o$ t)e r,le% in t)o%e ca%e% i% %)ort%ig)ted . At a -ini-,-D it -a3e% t)e bar loo3 bad. In contra%tD ba%ing r,le% or e7ception% on e-pirically provable contention% can $ore%tall t)e p,blic perception t)at et)ical reg,lation% -erely protect t)e g,ild. ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E 2NDE#3INES P2)LIC #ESPECT FO# ATTO#NE$S Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6* To t)e e7tent %trict r,le% ca,%e la2yer% to engage in !-oral e%capi%-D! con$identiality al%o )elp% $o%ter t)e p,blic notion t)at la2yer% lac3 integrity. #et ,% t)in3 abo,t t)e -atter $ro- t)e client%< per%pective. T)ey are told t)at virt,ally anyt)ing t)ey relate to t)e attorney 2ill be 3ept a %ecret. I$ t)ey 2i%) to ,%e t)e legal %y%te- to )ara%% an adver%aryD t)e la2yer 2ill di%c,%% t)e po%%ibility 2it) t)e- %erio,%ly. I$ t)ey 2i%) to con$e%% a )eino,% -i%deed t)ey )ave co--itted in t)e pa%tD t)ey can get it o$$ t)eir c)e%t% 2it)o,t $ear o$ repri%al . T)e
attorney 2ill be )appy to de%cribe option%D in %ecretD $or getting aro,nd govern-ent reg,lation% or contract,al obligation% "" to t)e point o$ eval,ating 2)ic) o$ t)e option% are illegalD 2)ic) are notD and 2)ic) are %)ady b,t ,nli3ely to be p,ni%)ed. To t)e e7tent litigation tactic% are not !$rivolo,%! or t)e prod,ct o$ bad $ait)D t)e la2yer -ay even be 2illing to %trategiBe 2it) t)e client abo,t t)e )ard%)ip and co%t t)at di%covery and ot)er legal proced,re% can i-po%e on an opponent and t)e li3eli)ood t)at t)e b,rden 2ill pro-pt $avorable %ettle-ent.
41
Attorney-Client Privilege Fail!, Wea5 Protection or Adver!arial Sy!te&

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E NOT ESSENTIAL TO AD%E#SA#$ S$STE3 -- 3AN$ P#OCED2#AL #2LES 2NDE#C2T BEALO2S PA#TISAN AD%OCAC$ Nancy 9. 3oore' La4 Pro e!!or-#1tger!' :/;<F:/;GD !#i-it% to Attorney"Client Con$identiality' A <P)ilo%op)ically In$or-ed< And Co-parative Approac) to #egal and /edical Et)ic%D! 6& Ca%e. W. (e%. 4**D p. ;44" A %econd obCection to la2yer di%clo%,re i% t)at it 2o,ld violate t)e d,ty o$ con$identiality. :o2everD ,nli3e party pre%entation o$ evidenceD con$identiality i% not it%el$ an e%%ential ele-ent o$ t)e adver%ary %y%te- . T)e %tandard rationale $or con$identiality i% ,tilitarian' Con$identiality enco,rage% client% to give la2yer% t)e in$or-ation nece%%ary $or e$$ective advocacy. 8,t t)i% ,tilitarian rea%oning ignore% t)e already e7i%ting deterrent% b,ilt into t)e adver%ary %y%te- it%el$ "" t)at i%D t)o%e very r,le% o$ civil proced,re de%igned to pro-ote tr,t)$,l verdict%. =iven t)e%e r,le% and t)e li-ited protection o$ t)e attorney"client privilegeD it i% di$$ic,lt to %ee )o2 an e7tended d,ty o$ con$identiality e$$ectively pro-ote% client di%clo%,re%D 2)en t)e client already 3no2% Gor %)o,ld 3no2H t)at )i% la2yer 2ill not co,ntenance a $al%e pleading or a $ail,re to re%pond to proper di%covery re+,e%t%. Alt)o,g) t)e critici%- t)at ,nder t)e dra$t propo%al a la2yer !co,ld not pro-i%e )i% client t)at )i% preli-inary di%clo%,re%
-ig)t not inC,re )i% ca,%e! i% tr,eD it i% al%o tr,e t)at a la2yer cannot tr,t)$,lly -a3e t)at pro-i%e even ,nder t)e pre%ent r,le%.
2tilitarian Fra&e4or5 Fail! to >1!ti y Attorney-Client Privilege

DIFFIC2LT TO ASSESS T-E )ENEFITS OF T-E P#I%ILE"E T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. *;"6
Alt)o,g) al-o%t no one advocate% aboli%)ing t)e attorney"client privilege in it% entirety " indeedD it i% too late in t)e ga-e $or t)at " t)e ,tilitarian C,%ti$ication )a% it% critic%. So-e arg,e t)at t)e co%t% o$ t)e privilege o,t2eig) t)e p,rported bene$it% in certain conte7t%D and ot)er% +,e%tion 2)et)er t)e bene$it% are in $act real . For e7a-pleD %c)olar%
)ave +,e%tioned 2)et)er t)e corporate attorney"client privilege i% nece%%ary and 2)et)er it en)ance% %ocial 2el$are. Ot)er% -ay contend t)at t)e bene$it% o$ t)e privilege are too %pec,lative to C,%ti$y t)e co%t%. In additionD C,dge% and litigant%D $aced 2it) privilege"created ob%tacle% in a partic,lar piece o$ litigationD -ay $ind t)e privilege<% )ar%) con%e+,ence% ,nbearably di$$ic,lt to accept. T)e $act t)at t)e bene$it% o$ t)e privilege are e7trin%ic and %pec,lative 2)ile t)e co%t% are intrin%ic to t)e partic,lar di%p,te in 2)ic) t)e privilege i% a%%ertedD co-bined 2it) t)e %)eer $re+,ency o$ privilege clai-%D a%%,re% t)at t)e privilege 2ill re-ain controver%ial and di$$ic,lt to apply. /o%t C,dge%D la2 -a3er%D attorney%D and
%c)olar% tend to agree t)at t)e privilege i% ,%e$,l and i-portantD b,t %)o,ld be narro2ly con%tr,ed. T)ere i% $ar le%% agree-entD )o2everD a% to 2)at e7actly t)i% -ean%D eit)er generally or in partic,lar ca%e%.
2NCE#TAINT$ 2NDE#3INES 2TILITA#IAN AD%ANTA"ES T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. *6"4 T)e ,tilitarian C,%ti$ication $or t)e attorney"client privilege i% pre-i%ed on t)e a%%,-ption t)at providing protection $or attorney"client con$idence% 2ill en)ance client candor orD at a -ini-,-D $o%ter greater attorney"client co--,nication. Alt)o,g) -o%t co,rt%D practitioner%D and co--entator% accept t)i% a%%,-ption o,trig)tD it i% bot) di%p,ted and e-pirically ,nveri$ied. S3eptic% t)ere$ore re-ainD even t)o,g) -o%t a%pect% o$ t)e -odern privilege " incl,ding t)e corporate privilege " are al-o%t certainly )ere to %tay. De%pite t)e lingering controver%yD t)e privilege cannot en)ance candor or co--,nication i$ t)e protection it a$$ord% i% ,ncertain. T),%D $or %ociety to reap bene$it% $ro- t)e privilegeD it -,%t a$$ord %,$$iciently certain protection $or attorney"client co--,nication%. DIFFIC2LT TO WEI"- T-E COSTS AND )ENEFITS OF ATTO#NE$ CLIENT P#I%ILE"E (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;1"65 T)e protection o$ con$idential co--,nication% create% con$o,nding con$lict bet2een co-peting %ocietal intere%t%D not bet2een rig)t and 2rong. It involve% t)e rare in%tance% in 2)ic) %ecrecy i% dee-ed %o i-portant t)at it pree-pt% t)e %earc) $or tr,t) in t)e trial %y%te- . T)ere are %trong rea%on% to enco,rage
con$identiality bet2een t)e partie% %o t)at i-portant val,e%""treat-entD pro$e%%ional and legal adviceD p,blic in$or-ation""are enco,raged by t)e la2. Jet co-peting intere%t% -ay be pre%ent""la2 en$orce-ent partic,larly""and no legal %y%te- co,ld
e7i%t i$ people co,ld clai- t)at t)ey are beyond t)e reac) o$ t)e la2 beca,%e %o-e )ig)er p,blic p,rpo%e i% %erved t)ro,g) pre%erving t)e %ecrecy o$ t)eir relation%)ip% 2it) t)eir con$ederate% . T)ere i% a co%t"bene$it calc,l,% in %tri3ing t)e appropriate balance bet2een t)e need $or evidence and t)e protection o$ privacy. 8,t t)ere i% no %cienti$ic logarit)- $or -ea%,ring t)e re%pective 2eig)t o$ t)e%e %,bCective val,e%. S-O2LD CONST#2E NA##OWL$ -- )ENEFITS SPEC2LATI%E -A#3S #EAL T)o-a% A. De&etrio' Pa!t Pre!ident C(icago )ar A!!ociation' *+++' !Trial Practice' ObCectionE Attorney"Client Privilege""O) (eallyF!D 44 C8A (ecordD 41D p. 41 Dean Wig-ore al%o 2arned again%t t)e danger o$ overe7tending t)e privilege ' <T)e privilege re-ain% an e7ception to t)e general d,ty to di%clo%e. It% bene$it% are all indirect and %pec,lativeI it% ob%tr,ction i% plain and concrete * * *. It i% 2ort) pre%erving $or t)e %a3e o$ a general policyD b,t it i% nonet)ele%% an ob%tacle to t)e inve%tigation o$ t)e tr,t). It o,g)t to be %trictly con$ined 2it)in t)e narro2e%t po%%ible li-it% con%i%tent 2it) t)e logic o$ it% principle.<
. Wig-oreD Evidence Sec. ;;14D at 4 Grev. ed. 41&4H.
2TILITA#IANIS3 #E?2I#ES WEI"-IN" )ENEFITS A"AINST -A#3S TO SOCIAL "OOD
-arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' III. Attorney Client Privilege! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 4 5;"6 #ater C,%ti$ication% o$ t)e privilege incorporated ,tilitarian analy%i% . Early ,tilitarian% con%idered t)e privilege in%tr,-ental in ac)ieving %ocial good beca,%e it 2o,ld ind,ce client% to con%,lt $reely 2it) legal advi%er%. Ac+,iring e7pert legal advice and repre%entation 2o,ld in t,rn )elp client% operate 2it)in a )ig)ly co-ple7 co,rt %y%te-. Alt)o,g) t)e early ,tilitarian t)eory and t)e )onor"ba%ed C,%ti$ication co"e7i%ted $or a ti-eD #ord /an%$ieldD in T)e
D,c)e%% o$ Aing%ton<% Ca%eD e7plicitly reCected t)e )onor"ba%ed C,%ti$ication beca,%e t)e %a-e rationale -ig)t al%o C,%ti$y t)e creation o$ a privilege $or p)y%ician"patient relation%)ip%. T)erea$terD t)e attorney"client privilege 2a% C,%ti$ied a% a -ean% to
a%%,re t)e client o$ t)e e$$ective legal a%%i%tance o$ a 2ell"in$or-ed trial attorney. Wig-ore cry%taliBed t)i% ,tilitarian C,%ti$ication and %eparated it $ro- prior rig)t%"ba%ed t)eorie%. :e arg,ed t)at t)e privilege %)o,ld be available only 2)en t)e bene$it% t)at -ig)t in,re to all o$ %ociety $ro- enco,raging co--,nication% bet2een all attorney% and t)eir client% 2o,ld o,t2eig) t)e %y%te-ic co%t% to t)e co,rt<% $act"$inding proce%% o$ doing 2it)o,t any attorney<% te%ti-ony. Wig-ore<% partic,lar balancing approac) t),% 2eig)ed general co%t% and bene$it% acro%% all o$ %ociety 2it)o,t ta3ing into acco,nt any notion% o$ individ,al rig)t%. 8y loo3ing only at broad %ocietal co%t% and bene$it%D Wig-ore diverted attention $ro- individ,al% and t)eir rig)t%. 2TILITA#IANIS3 )ALANCIN" 32T2ALL$ E9CL2SI%E WIT- ACCO2NTIN" FO# #I"-TS -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' III. Attorney Client Privilege! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 4 54 T)i% divi%ion )a% pro-pted a rob,%t debate over t)e appropriate %cope o$ t)e privilege. T)e ,tilitarian ca-p generally arg,e% $or a narro2er privilegeD C,%t a% Wig-ore did in 4154D by balancing ea%ily ob%erved %ocial co%t% 2it) le%% concrete bene$it%. T)e non",tilitarian t)eori%t% arg,e $or e7pan%ion o$ t)e privilegeD $oc,%ing on t)e rig)t% t)at t)e privilege protect% and abandoning ca,tion concerning t)e co%t o$ $,lly protecting t)o%e rig)t%. Eac) %ide in t)e debate applie% it% approac) to C,%ti$ying t)e privilege to t)e e7cl,%ion o$ t)e ot)erD treating t)e t2o t)eorie% a% -,t,ally e7cl,%ive. ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E C#EATES ET-ICAL CON2ND#23 -- POSTIS CO3PETIN" %AL2ES A"AINST EAC- OT-E# (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;;."1 T)e balancing re+,ired by c)allenge% to con$identiality co-e% do2n to c)oo%ing bet2een rig)t% . Wit) a cla%)
bet2een rig)t and 2rongD $or e7a-pleD bet2een privacy and police -i%cond,ct Gin Fo,rt) A-end-ent ca%e% involving 2rong$,l %earc)e%HD t)e c)oice i% ea%ier. 8,t 2)en t)e c)oice i% bet2een one rig)t Gt)e rig)t o$ privacyH and anot)er rig)t Gt)e rig)t to a $air and open trialHD t)e deci%ion -a3er $ace% a con,ndr,-' W)ic) i% -ore i-portant ""en%,ring %olicit,de to a cri-inal 2)o %ee3% religio,% or -edical or legal adviceD or en%,ring t)at cri-e% are deterred and p,ni%)edF To a%3 t)at +,e%tion i% to %,gge%t it% an%2er. A% a general r,leD protecting t)e %anctity and privacy o$ con$idential
co--,nication% i% t)e val,e -o%t people 2o,ld %,pport""b,t not 2)en a palpable anti%ocial act i% t)e re%,lt. Do %ociety<% intere%t% al2ay% ta3e precedence over t)e individ,al<%F All con%ideration% abo,t con$identiality contain a co-peting ,nderc,rrent. A% -,c) a% people %ee3 privacy and %ecrecyD t)ey al%o re+,ire openne%% and tran%parency and co--,nication. T)o%e intere%t% o$ten inter%ect and
create con$lict% 2)o%e re%ol,tion% are at t)e core o$ t)e %ocial contract.
3yt( o 3oral >1!tice, Attorney-Client Privilege 2nder&ine! >1!tice Sy!te&

#2LES LI8E ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E 2NDE#3INE 3O#AL >2STICE T)ane #o!en.a1&' Lect1rer in La4 at Ford(a& 2niver!ity' *++G' !T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y o,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% To Do W)at<% (ig)tD! 4 CardoBo P,b. #. Pol<y M Et)ic% 9. 6D p. 6 I 2rote T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%ticeD pri-arilyD a% a -oral criti+,e o$ t)e legal %y%te-. In e7a-ining t)e rit,al% and practice% o$ t)e la2 ,nder -oral criteria " it% ob%e%%ive $oc,% on Bero"%,- conte%t%D it% dedication to cold r,le% and proced,ral tec)nicalitie% over ),-an e-otionD it% $ail,re to ac3no2ledge t)e %pirit,al pain o$ t)o%e 2)o co-e be$ore itD it% inability to create an at-o%p)ere 2)ere apologie%D reconciliationD and t)e re%toring o$ -oral balance to relation%)ip% i% po%%ibleD it% pre$erence $or C,dicial econo-y over tr,t)D it% privileging o$ %ecret% and indi$$erence to lie%D and it% $ail,re to pro-ote an at-o%p)ere o$ -,t,al caring and connection by not i-po%ing a d,ty to re%c,e " t)e boo3 i% an indict-ent o$ t)e legal %y%te- $or %-,gly believing t)at t)e correct legal re%,lt i% nece%%arily con%i%tent 2it) t)e rig)t -oral o,tco-e. Evidence and proced,ral r,le%D attorney"client privilege%D %ettle-ent% and plea bargain%D t)e )o%tility o$ adver%arial proceeding%D all %everely ,nder-ine t)e %torytellingD tr,t)"%ee3ing di-en%ion% o$ 2)at people e7pect 2)en t)ey co-e be$ore t)e la2. And t)i% $ail,re lie% at t)e )eart o$ 2)y -oral C,%tice i% -erely a -yt). A legal %y%te- t)at care% -ainly abo,t applying t)e la2 in -ec)anicalD overly tec)nicalD and %o,lle%% 2ay% to t)e e7cl,%ion o$ ot)er val,e% i% not a legal %y%te- t)at i% intere%ted in -a3ing %,re t)at it% C,dg-ent% -a3e -oral or e-otional %en%e to t)o%e 2)o loo3 to t)e la2 $or 2i%do-D g,idanceD and re%ol,tion . ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E PLACES P#OFESSIONAL ET-ICS O%E# 3O#AL >2STICE -- DESENSITIBES LAW$E#S TO 3O#AL ?2ANDA#IES T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;* David E. AelleyD t)e creator o$ t)e a2ard"2inningD critically acclai-ed televi%ion dra-a The PracticeD )a% a partic,lar intere%t in %toryline% t)at deal 2it) t)e attorney client privilege. /any epi%ode% )ave involved an attorney 2it) privileged b,t da-aging and -orally co-pro-i%ing in$or-ation abo,t )i% or )er client. T)e attorney 3no2% t)atD et)icallyD t)e %ecret can<t be revealed. Jet )e i% tor-ented by an int,itive a2arene%% t)at a la2yer %)o,ld not abandon )i% private con%cience %i-ply beca,%e t)e et)ical r,le% o$ t)e pro$e%%ion %)i$t t)e -oral obligation% el%e2)ere. !At %o-e point la2yer% inevitably beco-e de%en%itiBed to -oral +,andarie% D! Aelley %aid in an intervie2 $or an article $or t)e New York Times. !Privilege% are a good e7a-ple o$ t)i%D beca,%e t)e 3eeping and protecting o$ %ecret% co-e at t)e blatant e7pen%e o$ -orality. It<% a given not to reveal client con$idence%. 8,t in The PracticeD o,r
la2yer%D on a 2ee3ly ba%i%D +,e%tion r,le% t)at la2yer% )ave to $ollo2 in t)e real 2orld. O,r c)aracter% e7a-ine et)ical con,ndr,-% t)at real la2yer% don<t ever +,e%tion.!
3yt( o 3oral >1!tice Lin5, P1tting #1le! A.ove Tr1t(See5ing

P2TTIN" P#OCED2#AL #2LES A)O%E T#2T- SEE8IN" I33O#AL AND 2NDE#3INES P2)LIC CONFIDENCE IN >2STICE S$STE3 T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 44* S,c) proced,ralD overly narro2 and tec)nical application% o$ t)e la2 al2ay% co-e acro%% a% i--oral to t)o%e 2)o believe t)at t)e legal %y%te- %)o,ld )onor tr,t)% and do 2)at<% C,%t. #oop)ole% ,nder-ine t)e $ait) and certainty in t)e la2. And 2)en cri-inal% go ,npro%ec,ted beca,%e o$ a tec)nical in$raction or a proced,ral irreg,larityD t)e %tory goe% ,ntold and C,%tice re-ain% ,ndone. IndeedD t)e %tory o$ t)e proced,ral lap%e it%el$ beco-e% t)e only %toryD %,per%eding entirely t)e ,nderlyingD %,b%tantive event% t)at gave ri%e to t)e cri-e or action. S,c) legal -ane,ver% operate o,t%ide t)e bo,ndarie% o$ -oral C,%ticeD breeding enor-o,% re%ent-ent and di%content and in$l,encing negative attit,de% abo,t t)e legal %y%te- in t)e general p,blic. I$ co,rt% o$ la2 are
%,ppo%ed to do C,%tice and di%cover tr,t)%D t)en 2)y %)o,ld loop)ole%D tec)nicalitie%D and proced,ral irreg,laritie% deprive t)e ,lti-ate tr,t)% $ro- being 3no2n and t)e %torie% t)at give ri%e to t)e- $ro- being toldF Eac) o$ t)e%e diver%ion% $ro- tr,t)% reveal% general i-per$ection% o$ o,r con%tit,tional %y%te- . A nation b,ilt ,pon de-ocratic ideal%D civil libertie%D and a ro-antic vi%ion o$ $reedo- i% bo,nd to di%cover t)at legal o,tco-e% 2ill occa%ionally co-e acro%% a% plain 2rong. Pre%,-ption% o$ innocenceD t)e e+,al and d,e proce%% cla,%e% o$ t)e Con%tit,tionD and t)e e7cl,%ionary r,leD eac)D in t)eir o2n 2ayD provide rig)t% b,t are al%oD at ti-e%D re%pon%ible $or -oral 2rong%. W)ile 2e generally l,7,riate in t)e%e rig)t%D C,dge%D la2yer% and la2 pro$e%%or% %ee- to be ,n-ind$,l abo,t t)e 2ay i--oral o,tco-e%""and t)e tra-pling o$ t)e tr,t)""co-pletely %abotage t)e $ait) t)at t)e p,blic %)o,ld )ave in t)e la2 a% an in%tit,tion .
PLACIN" TEC-NICAL #2LES A)O%E T#2T- @ AD%E#SA#IAL NAT2#E OF P#OCESS I33O#AL T)ane #o!en.a1&' Lect1rer in La4 at Ford(a& 2niver!ity' *++G' !T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y o,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% To Do W)at<% (ig)tD! 4 CardoBo P,b. #. Pol<y M Et)ic% 9. 6D p. 4 Di%torting and -anip,lating t)e tr,t)D perpet,ating lie%D con$,%ing ad-ini%trative C,%tice 2it) $,nda-ental notion% o$ 2)at i% C,%tD %,bCecting legal o,tco-e% to a )o%tile 3noc3"do2nD drag"o,t %porting conte%t 2)ere t)e goal i% to de%troy one<% adver%aryD %ilencing victi-% and t)e aggrieved $ro- %pea3ing to t)eir lo%%e%D inC,ryD and betrayal D creating an at-o%p)ere o$ i-placable de$en%ivene%% and ,napologetic %el$"rig)teo,%ne%% rat)er t)an one o$ tr,e ),-an enco,nter and -oral repairD are not e7a-ple% o$ a -oral %y%te- o$ C,%tice. Jet t)e%e practice% are not only per$ectly legalD t)ey are %tandard practice in o,r legal %y%te-. LE"AL S$STE3 I"NO#ES T#2T- -- FOC2SES ON "FACTS" T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4&"* T)e legal %y%te- al2ay% %ee-% to ignore t)at t)e p,blic )a% in)erent e7pectation% abo,t t)e la2D 2)ic) con$lict 2it) t)e -ore circ,-%cribed vi%ion o$ 2)at t)e la2 )a% in -ind $or it%el$. Tr,t) i% one e7a-ple o$ t)i% bro3en tr,%t. T)e legal %y%te- $,nction% +,ite 2ell 3no2ing t)at -o%t ca%e% don<t end ,p ac)ieving any -ea%,re o$ tr,t). In $actD trial%D legal %ettle-ent%D and plea bargain% generally re%,lt in eit)er %ilencing t)e tr,t) or ba%tardiBing it. T)e legal %y%te-D $or it% partD i% %ati%$ied 2it) learning $act%. I$ t)e $act% al%o t,rn o,t to be tr,eD t)at<% a $ort,ity o$ t)e legal %y%te-D not it% a%piration. 8,t $act% and tr,t)% are t2o di$$erent concept% entirely. Fact% don<t )ave to be tr,e. T)ey C,%t need to be $o,nd and applied to t)e la2. Fact% are arti$act% o$ t)e C,%tice %y%te-D 2)ile tr,t)% are trade-ar3% o$ t)e -oral ,niver%e. Fact i% a legal ter-I tr,t) i% a -oral one. T)e
legal %y%te-<% notion o$ C,%tice i% %erved by -erely $inding legal $act% 2it)o,t al%o incorporating t)e -oral di-en%ion% o$ e-otional and literal tr,t).
2S >2STICE S$STE3 PLACES CONCE#N FO# LE"AL #2LES A)O%E >2ST AND CO##ECT O2TCO3ES T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 64 9,dge% and la2yer% )ave a very narro2 vi%ion o$ 2)at t)e la2 can and %)o,ld acco-pli%) . W)at %ee-ingly -atter% -o%t i% t)at $inal C,dg-ent% co-port 2it) con%tit,tional proced,re%D prior legal precedent%D or

%tat,tory -andate%. A r,le get% applied to t)e $act%. T)e re%,lt i% C,%tice. It -ay be -orally 2rongD b,t t)e $oc,% on doing 2)at<% legal rat)er t)an on 2)at<% rig)t override% all ot)er con%ideration% and concern%.
INSISTENCE ON P#OCED2#AL #2LES AND O#DE# I33O#AL T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 445 8,t even to a%%,-e t)i% 3ind o$ decor,-D or to in%i%t on itD i% non%en%icalD i$ not plain i--oral . Everyt)ing abo,t li$e i% o,t o$ order. Indeed li$e i% ,n-i%ta3ably -e%%y and irre%ol,te. W)y %)o,ld a co,rtroo-D 2)ic) i% t)e gat)ering %pot o$ li$e<% ,nre%olved con$lict%D be a place t)at denie% t)e e%%ential ),-anity o$ t)o%e 2)o 2ander in%ide itF W)y in%i%t on order 2)en it %o -i%repre%ent% t)e ),-an e7perienceF =iven t)e%e tre-,lo,% beginning%D 2e %)o,ld not be robbing t)e trial o$ t)e very o7ygen t)at breat)ed li$e into t)e original di%p,te.
3yt( o 3oral >1!tice Lin5, Legal Di!co1r!e

LE"AL S$STE3 FOC2S AND DISCO2#SE I"NO#ES 3O#AL E%AL2ATIONS T)ane #o!en.a1&' Lect1rer in La4 at Ford(a& 2niver!ity' *++G' !T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y o,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% To Do W)at<% (ig)tD! 4 CardoBo P,b. #. Pol<y M Et)ic% 9. 6D p. 4 Invo3ing -oral i%%,e% and adopting t)e- a% part o$ t)e p,blic di%co,r%e i% not %o-et)ing A-erican %ociety " or at lea%t a partic,lar %eg-ent o$ %ociety " i% co-$ortable doing. W)et)er ac3no2ledged or notD t)ere i% a %plit bet2een t)e legal and t)e -oral in t)e A-erican legal %y%te-. And it i% not even a con%cio,% %plit. T)e -oral i%%,e i% %i-ply not part o$ t)e pict,reD and no one %ee-% to be alar-ed by it% ab%ence. T)at i% beca,%e legal deci%ion -a3ing and -oral con%cio,%ne%% are not t)e %a-e t)ing%D and no one i% partic,larly tro,bled by t)e lac3 o$ integration bet2een t)e t2o.
&
3yt( o 3oral >1!tice, ">1!tice" Sy!te& Doe! Not Foc1! on ">1!t" O1tco&e!
>2STICE S$STE3 DISTINCT F#O3 W-AT IS >2ST -- FOC2S ON P#OCED2#AL LE"AL #2LES %SD FOC2S ON W-AT IS 3O#AL AND #I"-T T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4*". T)ere i% a di$$erence bet2een C,%tice and doing 2)at<% C,%t. 9,%tice i% a legal ter-. It involve% t)e ad-ini%tration and -aintenance o$ t)e legal %y%te-D t)e -anner in 2)ic) it i% in%tit,tionally organiBedD t)e 2ay it pre%ent% it%el$ to t)e o,t%ide 2orld. 9,%tice live% according to it% o2n %et o$ internal r,le%. It i% governed by it% o2n proprietary rit,al% and $or-alitie%. It e7i%t% 2it)in a va%t labyrint)ine -aBe o$ b,rea,cratic and tec)nical proced,re%D $ed by an ine7)a,%tible %,pply o$ li$ele%% %tat,te% and precedent"a$$ir-ing ca%e%D c)o3ed by all t)o%e co,rt record%D doc3et n,-ber%D and 2ritten $or-%.
9,%tice in -any 2ay% )a% $ar -ore in co--on 2it) t)e %o,lle%%D airle%% at-o%p)ere t)at FranB Aa$3a concocted $or )i% c)aracterD 9o%ep) A.D in )i% novel The TrialD t)an anyt)ing t)at appro7i-ate% C,%t treat-ent or a C,%t re%,lt at t)e end o$ a long trial. Parado7icallyD t)ere i% no act,alD legal trial in The Trial""only one t)at i% %pirit,ally i-pri%oning. 9o%ep) A. never get% t)at $ar. :e<% too b,%y living ,nder t)e gaBe o$ acc,%ation and %,%picionD preparing $or a trial t)at never co-e%D yet a deat) %entence arrive% any2ay. Aa$3a<% portrayal o$ C,%tice i% )orri$icD b,t per)ap% all too acc,rate. T)e legal %y%te-<% pat) to C,%tice )a% a con%,-ptiveD -ac)ine"li3e +,ality to itD 2it) all it% grinding 2)eel% and %o,l"cr,%)ingD de),-aniBing di-en%ion%. T)e corridor% o$ C,%tice in The Trial are only attic"%iBeD providing not)ing b,t %,$$ocation and de%pair. Si-ilarlyD nearly t)ree +,arter% o$ a cent,ry earlierD not in Prag,eD b,t in #ondonD C)arle% Dic3en%D in )i% 0ictorian -a%terpiece &leak -ouseD i-agined t)e den%e $or o$ endle%% legal con$,%ion %,rro,nding t)e e%tate -atter o$ .arnd!ce v .arnd!ce. And t)ro,g)o,t t)e -ore t)an eig)t ),ndred page%D t)ere i% no re%ol,tionD C,%t blac3")old ang,i%) and r,ination. T)i% 2a% Dic3en%<% vi%ion o$ 2)at t)e Co,rt o$ C)ancery o$$ered citiBen% 2)o ca-e be$ore it eac) day li3e addicted beggar%D %ee3ing relie$ and C,%tice b,t receiving not)ing in ret,rn ot)er t)an 2a%ted ti-e and arre%ted live%. T)e 2ord !C,%t! )o2everD +,ite %eparate $ro- t)e 2ord !C,%ticeD! i-plie% a -oral di-en%ion. It %pea3% entirely to t)e -oral real- o$ o,r ),-anity. Doing 2)at<% C,%t i% t)e e7perience o$ providingD and ,lti-ately receivingD tr,e relie$.
To be C,%t i% not a legal a%piration b,t a -oral one. W)en %o-eone i% acting C,%tlyD t)e o,tco-e -a3e% %en%e not C,%t to t)e -indD b,t al%o in t)e )eart and %o,l.
3yt( o 3oral >1!tice, 3oral >1!tice Di!tinct Fro& Pro e!!ional Et(ic!
P#OFESSIONAL ET-ICS DISTINCT F#O3 W-AT IS 3O#ALL$ >2ST T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;. IndeedD legal et)ic% i% act,ally a -i%no-erD beca,%e t)e et)ic% t)at it %pea3% to i% not a general %en%e o$ proprietyD b,t rat)er %o-et)ing t)at i% %peci$ic to la2yer% alone. #i3e t)e 2ord% !re-edy! and !relie$D! la2yer% ,%e t)e 2ord !et)ic%! in a co-pletely di$$erent conte7tD %eparate $ro- it% ordinary -eaning. /o%t people t)in3 o$ et)ical cond,ct a% being e%%entially t)e %a-e t)ing a% -oral be)avior. 8,t legal et)ic% doe%n<t -ean !doing t)e rig)t t)ing.! It -ean% repre%enting client% $ait)$,llyD according to t)e %el$"reg,lating et)ical re+,ire-ent% o$ t)e pro$e%%ion t)e r,le% o$ t)e ga-e rat)er t)an t)e -oral %tandard% o$ rig)t and 2rong.
3yt( o 3oral >1!tice, 3oral >1!tice Di!tinct Fro& #eligion

3O#AL >2STICE DOES NOT #EL$ ON #ELI"ION T)ane #o!en.a1&' Lect1rer in La4 at Ford(a& 2niver!ity' *++G' !T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y o,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% To Do W)at<% (ig)tD! 4 CardoBo P,b. #. Pol<y M Et)ic% 9. 6D p. "& No2D a% I pointed o,t in t)e boo3D -oral C,%tice i% neit)er dependent onD nor dictated byD religio,% g,idance . /oral C,%tice doe% not ta3e it% direction $ro- religio,% a,t)oritie% or divine la2. T)e $act t)at people -a3e t)i% a%%,-ption
i% part o$ 2)at i% 2rong 2it) t)e +,ality o$ p,blic debate in A-erica. We )ave capit,lated t)e -oral gro,nd entirely to religio,% in%tit,tion%D a% i$ -orality i% t)e province only o$ t)e religio,% 2orld rat)er t)an %o-et)ing t)at i% innately ),-an and ,lti-ately an e7pre%%ion o$ o,r ),-anity. One doe% not )ave to be religio,%D or even believe in =odD in order to be -oral and to
engage in -oral act%. And -orality doe% not only )ave to be de$ined in religio,% ter-%. At)ei%t% are +,ite capable o$ being -oralD and vegetarian% 2)o re$,%e to eat ani-al% on -oral gro,nd% do not )ave to identi$y t)e-%elve% a% religio,% in order to )ave developed t)i% -oral -ind%et . In $actD -o%t religion% i-po%e no pro)ibition
on t)e eating o$ ani-al%. Doe% t)at -ean t)at at)ei%t% cannot )ave a -oral ba%i% $or declining to eat -eat %ince religion% apparently )ave no -oral +,al-% abo,t doing %oF
Attorney-Client Privilege %iolate! Fir!t A&end&ent

ST#ICT ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E %IOLATES FI#ST A3END3ENT #I"-TS Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6 4 /oreoverD it i% 2)i-%ical to a%%,-e t)at %trict r,le% can re-ain $ree $ro- legal attac3 . Forbidding la2yer% to di%clo%e in$or-ation t)ey $eel -orally obligated to reveal i-plicate% %erio,% $ree %peec) intere%t% . Since t)e S,pre-e Co,rt e7plicitly recogniBed la2yer%< $ir%t a-end-ent rig)t% in t)e early 41*5%D attorney% )ave -o,nted pro%pective legal c)allenge% to -any %peec)"re%trictive et)ical r,le% t)at previo,%ly %ee-ed i--,ne. A c)allenge to %trict
con$identiality i% li3ely to t,rn on t)e nat,re o$ t)e e-pirical evidence $or and again%t a bar<% C,%ti$ication% $or it% r,le. T)e availability o$ relevant data 2ill prove i-portant to proponent% and opponent% o$ con$identiality e7ception% ali3e.
&5
S(ielding EConeratingFECc1lpatory Evidence I&&oral

#EL$IN" ON P#I%ILE"E TO WIT--OLD E9ONE#ATIN" E%IDENCE FO# AN ACC2SED INNOCENT PE#SON IS 2N>2ST AND I33O#AL T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;5"4 In Morales v. PortuondoD a ;554 ca%e bro,g)t be$ore a $ederal di%trict co,rt C,dge in Ne2 Jor3D the court 2i%ely and -orally overt,rned a conviction and ,ndid a )orrible inC,%tice. /orale% 2a% $inally relea%ed $ro- pri%on a$ter %erving t)irteen year%. A% teenager%D )e and a code$endant )ad been convicted o$ -,rder. 9,%t prior to t)eir %entencingD )o2everD anot)er teenagerD Forne%D con$e%%ed to bot) a prie%t and a #egal Aid attorney t)at it 2a% )e 2)o )ad co--itted t)e -,rderD and not /orale%. T)e prie%t never revealed t)e con$e%%ionD nor did t)e #egal Aid attorneyD even t)o,g)
Forne% %tated clearly and ,ne+,ivocallyD !I a- )ere beca,%e I can<t %leepD can<t eatD no one )a% $orced -e or paid -e or told -e to do t)i%D C,%t %o-et)ing 2rong )a% )appened.! 8o,nd by t)e et)ic% o$ t)eir re%pective calling%D t)ey believed t)at t)ey
2ere prevented $rodi%clo%ing t)i% in$or-ationD even at t)e ri%3 o$ $,rt)ering an inC,%tice and co--it-ent t)eir o2n -oral cri-e% o$ co-plicity and neglect. In $actD t)e #egal Aid attorney ,lti-ately advi%ed Forne% not to te%ti$y and i-plicate )i-%el$. In t)e la2yer<% C,dg-entD
Forne%<% te%ti-ony 2o,ld )ot )ave altered t)e di%po%ition again%t /orale%D and 2o,ld )ave certainly re%,lted in preC,dice to Forne%D beca,%e )eD tooD 2o,ld no2 )ave to be pro%ec,ted $or t)e cri-e. /orale% 2a% convicted in 41.. and 2ent to Cail.
Forne% died in an ,nrelated incident in 411*. Jet t)e #egal Aid attorney %till -aintained t)e privilege and never ca-e $or2ard 2it) t)e tr,t)D even t)o,g) )i% client 2a% dead and t2o innocent -en )ad been in Cail $or over a decade. Only recently did t)e attorneyD a% 2ell a% t)e prie%tD decide to reveal 2)at t)ey )ad 3no2n all along. It i% tr,e t)at bot) t)e attorney and t)e prie%t event,ally did co-e $or2ardD and in doing %oD t)ey eac) c)o%e to violate t)e et)ical and
%acred d,tie% o$ t)eir pro$e%%ion%D t)ereby ri%3ing di%bar-ent and e7co--,nication. 8,t neit)er o$ t)o%e con%e+,ence% en%,ed. And
in t)e t)irteen year% t)at preceded t)eir deci%ion to brea3 t)eir vo2% and %pea3D t)eir %ilence a%%i%ted in de%troying a yo,ng -an<% li$e.
A %i-ilar criti+,e can be directed at t)e C,diciary. T)i% ca%e 2ent t)ro,g) vario,% %tage% o$ appeal% at t)e %tate and $ederal level%D in addition to t)e trial it%el$. In eac) in%tanceD t)e pre%iding C,dge% 2ere a2are o$ t)i% e7c,lpatory evidenceD b,t c)o%e
to ignore itD or e7plain it a2ay in order to ac)ieve a pre%,-ptively legal re%,lt regardle%% o$ it% %evere -oral i-plication%. P#I%ILE"E CAN )E 2SED TO PE#PET#ATE SE#IO2S IN>2STICE -- CON%ICTIN" OT-E# INNOCENT DEFENDANTS (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &."1 Willia- Wayne /ac,-ber 2a% convicted o$ t2o co,nt% o$ -,rder and given t2o conc,rrent li$e %entence%. 8e$ore /ac,-ber<% trialD anot)er per%on con$e%%ed to )aving co--itted t)e%e cri-e% to t)e t2o attorney% 2)o de$ended )i-. A$ter t)eir client diedD t)e %tate bar<% et)ic% co--ittee advi%ed t)e la2yer% t)at t)ey co,ld te%ti$y a% to t)eir client<% con$e%%ion %o t)at an inC,%tice co,ld be avoided. D,ring /ac,-ber<% trialD )o2everD t)e co,rt did not allo2 t)eir te%ti-ony. T)e co,rt allo2ed /ac,-ber to be convicted 2it)o,t t)e C,ry )earing abo,t t)e ot)er per%on<% con$e%%ion""%,rely a $act t)at 2o,ld )ave rai%ed rea%onable do,bt. To -a3e -atter%
2or%eD it 2a% t)e trial C,dge 2)o rai%ed t)e privilege Gt)e con$e%%or being deadHD a% t)e la2 per-it%. !T)e privilege doe% not ter-inate 2it) deat).!
One o$ t)e di%%enting C,dge% on t)e AriBona S,pre-e Co,rt %,gge%ted t)at t)e de$endant<% rig)t to pre%ent a de$en%e %)o,ld )ave prevailed over t)e decea%ed<% !property! rig)t beca,%e t)e decea%ed client co,ld no longer be pro%ec,ted. One co--entator noted t)e perver%ity o$ t)e r,ling' !T)e con%tit,tional rig)t o$ t)e acc,%ed to pre%ent )i% de$en%e i% rendered %,b%ervient tot )e rep,tational intere%t o$ a dead client in 3eeping )i% di%clo%,re% +,iet.! S2)>ECTIN" E9C2LPATO#$ E%IDENCE TO P#I%ILE"E CAN -A%E LIFE-AND-DEATCONSE?2ENCES (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. *5 A 0irginia ca%e ill,%trate% t)e need $or a C,dicial e7ception to t)e general r,le o$ privilege. T)e attorney $or one o$ t)e de$endant% in a $elony"-,rder ca%e ob%erved pro%ec,tor% coa7 and coac) )i% client to -odi$y )i% te%ti-ony %o t)at )i% code$endant co,ld be identi$ied a% t)e trigger-an and t),% eligible $or capital p,ni%)-ent.

A$ter t)e trialD t)e
&4
attorney a%3ed t)e %tate bar<% et)ic% advi%er i$ )e co,ld -a3e t)i% in$or-ation p,blic and %ave t)e li$e o$ t)e convicted -,rderer. :e 2a% told t)at )e co,ld not. W)enD ten year% laterD t)e deat)"ro2 convict appealed )i% deat) %entence Gon ot)er gro,nd%HD t)e attorney again %o,g)t per-i%%ion to relea%e t)e con$idential in$or-ation. T)e attorney %tated t)at )e 2o,ld )ave -aintained )i% e7c,lpatory %ecret i$ t)e bar<% et)ic% a,t)oritie% )ad in%i%ted t)at )e do %o. T)i% ti-e )e 2a% told t)at )e co,ld relea%e )i% con$idential in$or-ation. A% a re%,ltD a %tate C,dge co--,ted t)e convict<% deat) %entence to li$e i-pri%on-ent . One can +,e%tion 2)y t)e la2 %)o,ld per-it %,c) an e7tre-e inC,%tice to re%,lt $ro- a rigid r,le abo,t con$identiality. 2SIN" P#I%ILE"E TO S-IELD E9C2LPATO#$ E%IDENCE IS 2NET-ICAL AND I33O#AL (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. *5 A Nort) Carolina attorney $aced a )o%tile C,dge 2)en )e te%ti$iedD again%t t)e C,dge<% ad-onitionD abo,t )i% dead client<% re-ar3% t)at -ig)t )ave $reed an innocent -an convicted $or a do,ble -,rder and %entenced to li$e i-pri%on-ent. T)e e7perienced la2yer arg,ed t)at )e )ad an et)ical and -oral i-perative to di%clo%e t)e%e con$idential conver%ation%. #ay ob%erver% are criticalD ,nder%tandablyD o$ a r,le t)at per-it% grave inC,%tice%. So-e
%tate% per-it e7ception% to t)e con$identiality r,le to prevent an e7ec,tionI only /a%%ac),%ett% allo2% t)e e7ception to prevent 2rong$,l incarceration.
&;
S(o1ld P1t Tr1t( A(ead o Privilege Wit( ECc1lpatory Evidence

S-O2LD ADOPT POLIC$ TO P#OTECT T-E T#2T- W-EN IT IN%OL%ES E9C2LPATO#$ E%IDENCE To- Stacy' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity o 8an!a!' ://:' !T)e Searc) $or Tr,t) in Con%tit,tional Cri-inal Proceeding%D! 14 Col,-. #. (ev. 46&1D p. 46*5"4
Co)erence i% a +,ality all rational t)o,g)t -,%t po%%e%% and it occ,pie% a )ig) place in la2. IndeedD (onald D2or3in can be interpreted to arg,e t)at p,tatively legal r,le% lac3ing co)erence cannot tr,ly clai- to be la2. Co)erence i% e%pecially i-portant in con%tit,tional la2 "" t)e $o,ndational principle% ,pon 2)ic) o,r polity re%t%. Jet a ba%ic incon%i%tency appear% to rend t)e @nited State% S,pre-e Co,rt<% deci%ion% regarding t)e con%tit,tional rig)t% o$ cri-inal de$endant% . T)e 8,rger and (e)n+,i%t Co,rt% )ave repeatedly cited t)e i-portance o$ acc,rate adC,dication a% a rea%on to interpret re%trictively rig)t% t)at can be called !tr,t)"i-pairingD! t)at i%D rig)t% 2it))olding relevant evidence o$ g,ilt $ro- t)e adC,dicative proce%%. T)i% logic i-plie% t)at t)e Co,rt %)o,ld broadly con%tr,e rig)t% t)at p,t e7c,lpatory evidence be$ore C,rie% and t)at t)e Co,rt )a% it%el$ de%cribed a% !tr,t)"$,rt)ering.! Jet t)e Co,rt $re+,ently )a% not con%tr,ed %,c) rig)t% a% broadly a% it% r)etoric abo,t t)e i-portance o$ acc,rate adC,dication 2o,ld %,gge%t t)at it %)o,ld.
&6
Attorney-Client Privilege S(o1ld )e Treated Li5e Ot(er Privilege!, Sa&e )alancing

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E S-O2LD )E S2)>ECT TO T-E SA3E )ALANCIN" AS T-E OT-E# P#I%ILE"ES (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. .& W)y not ,%e a C,dicial balancing te%t in all ca%e% 2)ere an i%%,e i% rai%ed in good $ait) to deter-ine i$ an attorney"client privilege %)o,ld be en$orcedF T)at proced,re i% $ollo2ed in ca%e% dealing 2it) acco,ntant%D doctor%D Co,rnali%t%D and ot)er%. I$ a co-pelling co-peting %ocial intere%t i% e%tabli%)ed G%,c) a% t)e decea%ed"client e7ception -entioned earlierHD co,rt% co,ld t)en per-it an e7ception to t)e general r,le o$ con$identiality.
Pro$e%%ional r,le% o$ con$identiality 2o,ld protect -o%t interaction%D ,nle%% a co,rt r,led ot)er2i%e. A% /r. Carrington di%covered in t)e novel $emocrac!D -entioned at t)e beginning o$ t)i% c)apterD t)ere -,%t be roo- $or a r,le t)at ai-% to enco,rage
attorney% to $ollo2 t)e rig)t r,le% and %ee3 t)e -oral re%,lt.
&4
Attorney-Client Privilege S(o1ld )e Treated Li5e Ot(er Privilege!, D1ty to Di!clo!e T(reat! to "eneral P1.lic
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E E9E3PT F#O3 T-E P2)LIC SAFET$ CONSIDE#ATIONS T-AT OPE#ATE #E"A#DIN" OT-E# P#I%ILE"ES Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6&4"6
At t)e )eart o$ attorney"client con$identiality r,le% i% t)e notion t)at la2yer% are client%< agent%D and o$ten t)eir $id,ciarie%. Agency la2 re+,ire% pre%ervation o$ principal%< con$idence% and $orbid% agent% to pro$it per%onally $ro- in$or-ation t)e principal )a% di%clo%ed in %ecret. Attorney"client r,le%D )o2everD e7pand t)e re%pon%ibility o$ la2yer% to -aintain client %ecret% beyond agency la2 %tandard%. Ordinary agent% -ay not %ell or atte-pt to bene$it per%onally $rodi%clo%ing con$idence%.
8,t t)ey are !privileged to reveal in$or-ation con$identially ac+,ired by Kt)e-L in t)e co,r%e o$ Kt)eirL agency in t)e protection o$ a %,perior intere%t o$ Kt)e-%elve%L or o$ a t)ird per%on.! T)i% di%clo%,re privilege i% re$lected in t)e everyday practice o$ non"legal pro$e%%ional%D %,c) a% p)y%ician%D 2)o nor-ally 3eep con$identiality. In contra%tD t)e %trict ver%ion% o$ attorney"client con$identiality li-it an attorney<% rig)t to di%clo%e to %it,ation% involving dangero,% $,t,re cri-e%. Not even t)e -o%t liberal o$ la2yer code% incl,de% a catc)"all
!%,perior intere%t! provi%ion. A% a re%,ltD %trict con$identiality
r,le% $orbid attorney% to di%clo%e in a variety o$ %it,ation% in 2)ic) ot)er agent% -ig)t )ave $ree rein to $ollo2 t)eir con%cience% . In t)e ab%ence o$ a client<% declared intent to co--it or participate in a cri-eD %trict r,le% -ig)t 2ell $orbid an attorney to di%clo%e a con$idence to protect t)ird partie% $ro- cri-inal )ar-D a% in t)e 3idnapping )ypot)etical noted in t)e introd,ction. Standard di%clo%,re e7ception% al%o do not
cover %it,ation% in 2)ic) t)e client plan% to co--it potentially tortio,%D b,t noncri-inalD activity. For e7a-ple' T)e general co,n%el to a $ir- t)at prod,ce% a -etal alloy ,%ed in t)e -an,$act,re o$ airplane% learn% o$ a co-pany %t,dy t)at %,gge%t% t)at in %o-e )ig)"altit,de $lig)t pattern% t)e alloy -ig)t 2ea3en and ca,%e a plane to e7plode. T)e alloy doe%D )o2everD -eet t)e -ini-,- %a$ety %tandard% %et by t)e govern-ent. T)e la2yer ,rge% t)e 8oard o$ Director% to recall t)e alloy or at a -ini-,- to in$or- ,%er% o$ it% potential danger. T)e 8oard decide% t)at t)e %t,dy i% too inconcl,%ive to 2arrant actionD in lig)t o$ t)e dire $inancial con%e+,ence% o$ di%clo%,re to t)e co-pany.
@nli3e t)e doctor 2)o -,%t )elp police identi$y participant% in cri-e% involving g,n%)ot%D la2yer% ,%,ally -,%t 3eep evidence o$ pa%t cri-inal activity %ecretD a% in t)i% %cenario'
A client $ort,ito,%ly receive% an ,nde%erved pay-ent $ro- t)e govern-ent Ge.g.D a d,plicate 2el$are c)ec3 or ta7 re$,ndH and depo%it% it in a %aving% acco,nt. T)e client t)en contact% )i% attorneyD 2)o advi%e% t)e client to ret,rn t)e -oney. T)e client re$,%e%.
P-$SICIAN P#I%ILE"E E9ISTS WIT-IN A F#A3EWO#8 W-IC- OWES A -I"-E# D2T$ TO T-E "ENE#AL P2)LIC T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;& Jet i$ a la2yer 3no2% t)e tr,t) b,t -,%t advocate on be)al$ o$ )i% client in a 2ay t)at ob%c,re%D $al%i$ie%D or divert% attention a2ay $ro- t)e tr,t) " leading t)e co,rt or corporate %)are)older% to dra2 $al%e concl,%ion% and reac) C,dg-ent% t)at are tanta-o,nt to lie%"" )o2 i% t)at %erving t)e intere%t% o$ %ociety and C,%ticeF Doctor% and p%yc)ot)erapi%t%D $or in%tanceD al%o )ave a d,ty to -aintain patient con$idence%D b,t not at t)e e7pen%e o$ a )ig)er d,ty o2ed to t)e general p,blic. In t)e%e pro$e%%ion%D t)e et)ical d,ty to di%clo%e a doctor"patient privilege i% -andated in certain in%tance % Gto prevent )ar- or inC,ryHD 2)ile in t)e legal pro$e%%ionD t)e r,le i% only t)at t)e attorney -ay reveal t)e %ecretD and not t)at )e %)o,ld or -,%t.
&
AT, "ECception! Prevent -ar& ro& Attorney Client Privilege"

E9CEPTIONS TO P#I%ILE"E TOO NA##OWL$ CONST#AINED -- ONL$ #ECO"NIBE -A#3 TO T-E )OD$ AS I3PO#TANT T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;6
T)e ne2 r,le i% an i-prove-entD -orallyD over t)e original lang,ageD beca,%e it re-oved t)e 2ord% !i--inent! and !cri-inal.! T),% it red,ce% %o-e2)at t)e range o$ con$idence% t)at an attorney i% re+,ired to 3eepD beca,%e it per-it% t)e di%clo%,re o$ noncri-inal act% t)at -ay ta3e place in t)e $,t,re. GT)i% ne2 r,le %till 2o,ld not )ave c)anged t)e o,tco-e in t)e Sc)ae$er ca%e.H 8,t at t)e %a-e ti-eD t)e di%clo%,re o$ t)e con$idence i% allo2ed only 2)en )ar- -ig)t co-e to t)e bodyD and not t)e %pirit . Typical o$ t)e conventional legal paradig-D t)ere i% no d,ty to di%clo%e conte-plated act% o$ %pirit,al violenceD %,c)
a% e-otional )ar-D or t)e ca,%ing o$ ),-iliation or indignity. Financial -i%deed%D $ra,dD and -i%repre%entation% 2ere al%o not e7cl,ded $ro- t)e protection o$ t)e privilege. In all in%tance%D it 2a% clear t)at t)e ba%ic principle o$ t)e r,le re-ained intact""%)ort o$ ca,%ing p)y%ical )ar- to anot)er per%onD anyt)ing t)at a client di%c,%%e% 2it) )i% la2yer% i% privileged and cannot be revealed .
&&
**NE"ATI%E**
&*
Tr1t(-See5ing Not t(e 3ain "oal o t(e 2S >1!tice Sy!te&

T#2T- IS >2ST ONE OF 3AN$ CO3PETIN" "OALS OF T-E 2S >2STICE S$STE3 Daniel Wal i!(' La4 Cler5 or So1t(ern Di!trict o N$' *++<' !/a3ing #a2yer% (e%pon%ible $or t)e Tr,t)D! 6 Seton :all #. (ev. &46D p. &;4"; One %trand o$ arg,-ent again%t Fran3el<% propo%al% reCect% t)e idea t)at tr,t) %)o,ld be accorded a )ig)er priority in an adver%ary trial. T)i% po%ition )a% been arg,ed -o%t $orce$,lly by /onroe Freed-anD b,t ot)er% )ave -ade %i-ilar point%. Freed-anD in a re%pon%e t)at 2a% p,bli%)ed along%ide Fran3el<% articleD arg,ed t)at t)e A-erican legal %y%te- %erve% ot)er val,e%D li3e t)e pro-otion o$ individ,al dignityD in addition to tr,t). Serving individ,al dignityD Freed-an contendedD -ig)t %o-eti-e% re+,ire %,bordinating " and )enceD di%torting " tr,t). One e7a-ple i% t)e con%tit,tional
privilege again%t %el$"incri-ination. Freed-an +,oted @nited State% S,pre-e Co,rt C,%tice% 2)o )ave %,pported de$en%e attorney%< obligation to de$end client% vigoro,%lyD regardle%% o$ 2)et)er t)ey are g,ilty. None o$ t)e +,oted pa%%age% e7plain 2)y t)i% d,ty e7i%t% or 2)at -a3e% it -ore i-portant t)an tr,t)D b,t Freed-an o$$ered t)e $ollo2ing e7planation' ! 8e$ore 2e 2ill per-it t)e %tate
to deprive any per%on o$ li$eD libertyD or propertyD 2e re+,ire t)at certain proce%%e% 2)ic) en%,re regard $or t)e dignity o$ t)e individ,al be $ollo2edD irre%pective o$ t)eir i-pact on t)e deter-ination o$ tr,t).!
&.
>1!tice Sy!te& Fail! at Tr1t(-See5ing

C#I3INAL >2STICE S$STE3 FAILS AT T#2T--SEE8IN" 3ISSION T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. ."1
T)e bea,ty o$ art i% t)at it can reveal vi%ta% o$ ),-an co-ple7ity t)at are o$ten ignored in t)e -,ted dra-a% o$ t)e co,rt)o,%e. Arti%t% )ave long been $a%cinated 2it) trial% and t)e legal proce%%D and )ave ,%ed t)e la2 a% in%piration to addre%% large -oral and rede-ptive t)e-e%. :,-anity i% not only C,dged by t)e la2I it i% al%o %acri$iced 2)en it %,rrender% to it. 8,t t)e real li$e o$ t)e la2 i% a dra-a 2it)o,t e-otional te7t,re. It<% di$$ic,lt to learn a -oral le%%on $ro- 2atc)ing an act,al ca%eD beca,%e %o $e2 eit)er pre%ent a -oral dile--a or $ra-e t)e ca%e in -oral ter-%. /o%t %,$$er $ro- t)e %taidne%% o$ rit,al and ro,tineD and t)e predictability o$ precedent. 8,t art and literat,re t)at $oc,% on legal t)e-e%D 2)ic) are %o ab,ndant in o,r c,lt,reD provide ea%y re$erence point% t)at -a3e t)e -oral t)e-e% o$ t)i% boo3 -ore ,niver%ally ,nder%tood. IndeedD t)e literat,re t)at invo3e% la2 a% a plot device i% nearly al2ay% %teeped in -oral and %pirit,al concern%. We -ay all 3no2 t)e %tory o$ The Merchant o' /eniceD b,t 2)at 2e -ay not 3no2 i% it% -oral criti+,e on t)e rigidity o$ la2 and it% $ail,re a% a $acilitator o$ eit)er revenge or repair. T)e arti%t contin,ally re-ind% la2yer% o$ 2)at t)e la2 o$ten $ail% to do in t)e na-e o$ C,%tice.
T)i% cynici%- abo,t t)e legal pro$e%%ion i% not %o -,c) abo,t la2yer% being perceived a% di%)one%tD or only in it $or t)e -oneyD or t)at t)e la2 i% o$ten ,nC,%t. So-e o$ t)o%e perception% are eit)er tr,e or )ave beco-e clic)e% abo,t t)e legal %y%te-. 8,t t)ey are not t)e -ain %o,rce% o$ collective -i%tr,%t. T)ere i% yet anot)er $la2 D one t)at i% ,nna-ed b,t 2idely $eltD 2)ic) better ,nder%core% t)e p,blic<% a-bivalence abo,t t)e la2. W)at i% ,n$orgivableD and 2)at i% rarely ac3no2ledgedD i% t)at t)e la2 lac3% %o,lD t)at it i% 2it)o,t tenderne%%. It )a% no tolerance $or t)e e-otional co-ple7ity o$ t)o%e 2)o -,%ter t)e co,rage to enter a co,rtroo-D 2it) all o$ t)eir
con%olidated a-bition% and repre%%ed rageD 2o,nded ego%D petty Cealo,%ie% and perennial rivalrie%D co-petitive $ire% and t)2arted drea-%. T)e la2 place% too -,c) $ait) in it% o2n ability to 3no2 t)e $act%D to 3no2 2it) certainty 2)at
)appened and 2)at did not. It $oc,%e% too $erocio,%ly on 2)at i% ,tterly ,nreliable' t)e %earc) $or t)e concreteD literal tr,t). 8,t t)at i% %,c) an ill,%ory and el,%ive +,e%t. So-e tr,t)% t)e co,rt 2ill never di%cover. And %o-e di%coverable $act% )ave no relation to act,al tr,t)%. And yet in loo3ing $or )ard evidenceD it 2ill ignore all t)o%e
%o$t b,t cla%)ing e-otional tr,t)% t)at are %po3en be$ore t)e benc) and in%ide t)e 2itne%% bo7 "" and l,r3 o,t%ide t)e co,rt)o,%e "" eac) day. Fact% are never coldD b,t are $orever )eated. T)e la2 a%%,-e% an obCectivity t)at a% no place in li$eD beca,%e li$e i% pop,lated 2it) t)e %,bCective C,dg-ent% o$ irrational -en and 2o-enD 2)ic) i% preci%ely t)e pool $ro- 2)ic) e-panelled C,ror% and %2orn 2itne%%e% 2ade in and $ro- 2)ic) t)ey are %elected. Wit) it% ob%e%%ive in%,larity and narro2ne%%D it% preten%e t)at all t)at -ater% i% 2)at ta3e% place ,nder oat)D t)e la2 -i%%e% t)e e-otional bac3%toryD t)e %,ppre%%ed part o$ every la2%,it. T)e real dra-a o$ t)e ),-an e7perience get% played o,t not in a co,rtroo-D b,t on t)e %treet%D in%ide o$$ice% and )o-e%. :,-an trial and error precede% t)e legal trial
and %,per%ede% it in i-portance. 8eyond t)e %ole-n corridor% o$ t)e co,rtroo-D li$e i% dyna-icD ani-atedD volatile. T)i% i% 2)ere pat)% are totally ,npre%cribedD 2)ere n,ance and a-big,ity live a-id%t -e%%y irre%ol,tion. 9,%tice del,de% it%el$ into believing t)at $inal C,dg-ent% are indeed $inal. #egal $inality provide% not)ing b,t a $al%e clo%,re. Even t)e victor% don<t leave co,rt)o,%e% believing t)at e-otionally t)e ca%e i% all over and t)e i%%,e% are all %ettled.
And t)i% -oral criti+,e again%t t)e legal %y%te- applie% to bot) t)e cri-inal and civil area% o$ t)e la2.
T#2T- SEE8IN" IS NOT A "OAL O# O2TCO3E OF T-E 2S >2STICE S$STE3 T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4 "& @n$ort,natelyD t)e la2 i% not t)e place to $ind t)o%e an%2er%. 9,%tice -ay be abo,t -any t)ing%D b,t t)e -oral co-ple7ity o$ di%ting,i%)ing bet2een rig)t and 2rongD or arriving at t)e tr,t) o$ a given %it,ationD i% neit)er it% %trengt) nor it% o%ten%ible -i%%ion. Co,rt% o$ la2 are t)ere to ad-ini%ter C,%ticeD to e$$iciently %trea-line ca%e%D to en%,re t)e availability o$ a $or,- t)at o$$er% t)e c)ance at %o-e relie$ . It<% t)e po%%ibility o$ C,%tice t)at it
g,arantee%D not t)e +,ality o$ t)at C,%ticeD nor t)e certainty t)atD in t)e endD C,%tice 2ill -a3e %en%eD $eel rig)tD and re%olve -atter% in a 2ay t)at leave% t)e partie% better o$$ and reconciled to -ove on 2it) t)eir live%. T)e in%tit,tion o$ la2 de$ine% it%el$ a% an arbiter o$ legal di%p,te%D and not a% a di%pen%er o$ -oral le%%on% or %ee3er o$ tr,t)%. It t)rive% on an adver%arial proce%% t)at only ta3e% pri%oner% and leave% little roo- $or peace.
Tr,t) )a% a 2ay o$ %ee-ing incidental to t)e la2D an accidental by"prod,ct o$ a %tated goal t)at generally get% %)ort %)ri$t . T)e legal %y%te- C,%ti$ie% it% role in %ociety by i-po%ing di%cipline on t)e la2le%% and re%olving con$lict% "" o$ten
inade+,ately "" a-ong t)e re%t. T)e%e are it% $,nda-entally narro2 obCective%. A% long a% ca%eload% progre%%D C,%tice i% done. T)at<% 2)at %ervant% o$ t)e la2 -ean 2)en t)ey proclai-D ,napologeticallyD even a$ter an ,nC,%t verdictD t)at !t)e la2 )a% %po3en.<! 8,t 2)en t)e re%,lt% are i--oralD 2)at can be %aid abo,t t)e 2ord% t)at 2ere ,%ed to C,%ti$y t)e la2<% %po3en decreeF W)en t)e
application o$ t)e la2 i% perceived a% %en%ele%%D it )a% a %)attering e$$ect on t)e capacity o$ t)e partie% and t)e co--,nity to reconcile and -ove on.
&1
AD%E#SA#IAL S$STE3 3EANS T-AT WINNIN" 3ATTE#S 3O#E T-AN T#2T9a-e% /ar%)all Crotty' For.e! Contri.1tor' :+F+EF*+:ED !Do Debater% /a3e 8etter #a2yer%FD! )ttp'??222.$orbe%.co-?%ite%?Ca-e%-ar%)allcrotty?;546?45?56?do"debater%"-a3e"better"la2yer%?N* 5d dD
Nevert)ele%%D a% any debater or p)ilo%op)er 3no2%D in capitali%t C,ri%pr,denceD t)e very idea o$ paid %ervice i% ine7tricably tied ,p 2it) %el$"%erving gain. For t)at rea%onD la2D li3e debateD i%D in t)e endD abo,t %op)i%tryD not Socratic dialog,e. W)ile C,dge%D C,rie%D and la2yer% clai- to be intere%ted in Tr,t) 2it) a capital TD a la2 trial i% not a St. 9o)nO% College Don (ag %e-inar. ItO% a ga-e. And t)o%e de$endant% or plainti$$% 2it) t)e better player% on t)eir tea- P no -atter
2)at eac) playerO% -oral i-perative P end ,p garnering -ore $avorable re%,lt%D regardle%% o$ t)eir ,lti-ate g,ilt or innocence.
*5
Attorney-Client Privilege Doe! Not Con lict 4it( Tr1t(See5ing, T1rn-Increa!e! In or&ation
T2#N, ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E INC#EASES INFO#3ATION Ada- /. C(1d' La4 St1dent' :///' !In De$en%e o$ t)e =overn-ent Attorney"Client PrivilegeD! .4 Cornell #. (ev. 4&.;D p. 4&.1"15 Alt)o,g) one generally a%%,-e% t)at t)e attorney"client privilege red,ce% t)e a-o,nt o$ in$or-ation available to a co,rtD t)ere i% %,pport $or t)e contrary propo%ition t)at t)e attorney"client privilege act,ally pre%erve% %o-e in$or-ation t)at 2o,ld be lo%t ab%ent t)e privilege. T)e privilege enco,rage% di%c,%%ion bet2een an attorney and a client and t)ereby prevent% t)e lo%% o$ in$or-ation d,e to t)e client<% $ading -e-ory a% t)e ti-e gap bet2een t)e relevant event and trial increa%e%. T)i% pre%ervation o$ in$or-ation aid% t)e co,rt in it% %earc) $or tr,t). AdditionallyD
a$ter a la2yer in$or-% a client t)at conver%ation% are privilegedD t)e client 2ill not re$rain $rodi%c,%%ing %en%itive and potentially da-aging %,bCect% 2it) )er attorney $or t)e $ear t)at t)e di%c,%%ion 2ill be ,%ed again%t )er in co,rt. In %,-D t)e attorney"client
privilege allo2% a la2yer to give )ig) +,ality legal advice 2)ile depriving a co,rt o$ little in$or-ationI t)e client 2o,ld not nece%%arily )ave div,lged t)e in$or-ation to t)e co,rt ab%ent t)e protection o$$ered by t)e attorney"client privilege.
*4
Attorney-Client Privilege Doe! Not Con lict 4it( Tr1t(See5ing, Evidence Wo1ld Not )e Availa.le Wit(o1t Privilege
P#I%ILE"E -AS LITTLE I3PACT ON T#2T--SEE8IN"' WIT-O2T IT T-E STATE3ENTS WO2LD NOT )E 3ADE Ed2ard 9. I&4in5elried' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity College D1.lin' *++E' !An E%%ay on (et)in3ing t)e Fo,ndation% o$ Evidentiary Privilege%D! .6 8.@.#. (ev. 64 D p. 64. T)e S,pre-e Co,rt )a% repeatedly endor%ed t)i% t)eory. In 41*& in Fi%)er v. @nited State%D t)e Co,rt re-ar3ed t)at t)e attorney"client privilege i% intended to !protectKL only t)o%e di%clo%,re% ... 2)ic) -ig)t not )ave been -ade ab%ent t)e privilege.! In t)e 411& 9a$$ee opinionD 9,%tice Steven%D 2riting $or t)e -aCorityD elaborated' T)e li3ely evidentiary bene$it t)at 2o,ld re%,lt $ro- t)e denial o$ t)e Kp%yc)ot)erapi%t"patientL privilege i% -ode%t. I$ t)e privilege 2ere reCectedD con$idential conver%ation% bet2een p%yc)ot)erapi%t% and t)eir patient% 2o,ld %,rely be c)illed ... . Wit)o,t a privilegeD -,c) o$ t)e de%irable evidence to 2)ic) litigant% %,c) a% Kplainti$$L %ee3 acce%% " $or e7a-pleD ad-i%%ion% ... by a party " i% ,nli3ely to co-e into being. T)i% ,n%po3en !evidence! 2ill t)ere$ore %erve no greater tr,t)"%ee3ing $,nction t)an i$ it )ad been %po3en and privileged. /o%t recentlyD in t)e 411. S2idler M 8erlin deci%ion dealing 2it) t)e attorney"client privilegeD t)e C)ie$ 9,%tice %tated t)at !2it)o,t t)e privilegeD t)e client -ay not )ave -ade %,c) co--,nication% in t)e $ir%t place.! :enceD a% C)ie$ 9,%tice (e)n+,i%t contin,edD !t)e lo%% o$ evidence i% -ore apparent t)an real.! ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E DOES NOT I3PAI# T#2T- SEE8IN" Daniel Wal i!(' La4 Cler5 or So1t(ern Di!trict o N$' *++<' !/a3ing #a2yer% (e%pon%ible $or t)e Tr,t)D! 6 Seton :all #. (ev. &46D p. &;4" Anot)er re%pon%e to Fran3el<% propo%al 2a% in%tr,-ental' /a3ing la2yer% a$$ir-atively re%pon%ible $or t)e tr,t) 2o,ld )ave ,nde%irable %ide e$$ect%. Albert Al%c),lerD $or e7a-pleD %,gge%t% t)at protecting con$identiality doe% not i-pair t)e %earc) $or tr,t) beca,%e t)e p,rpo%e o$ con$identiality i% to ind,ce di%clo%,re% to t)e attorney t)at t)e client 2o,ld not -a3e Gand t)ere$oreD no one 2o,ld 3no2H in t)e ab%ence o$ t)e protection. @nder Fran3el<% propo%al%D
t)ere$oreD a client 2o,ld re$rain $ro- revealing -aterial adver%e $act%. @viller arg,ed t)at in t)e co--ercial conte7tD i-pairing con$idence -ig)t be ,nde%irable beca,%e t)e la2yer o$ten obtain% co-plete di%clo%,re $ro- t)e clientD and t)e la2yer can ,%e t)e di%clo%,re% to %teer t)e client a2ay $ro- ,nla2$,l activitie%. Willia- T. PiBBi )a% arg,ed t)at i$ a la2yer 2ere re+,ired to di%clo%e adver%e in$or-ationD t)e la2yer -ig)t %trategically avoid obtaining $,ll 3no2ledge. A de$ender o$ Fran3el<% propo%al% -ig)t re%pond t)at ,nder t)o%e propo%al%D a la2yer 2o,ld be pro)ibited $ro- avoiding $,ll 3no2ledge %o a% to be able to tell )al$"tr,t)% to t)e co,rt.
COSTS TO S$STE3 OF E9CL2DIN" E%IDENCE A#E O%E#)LOWN -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' III. Attorney Client Privilege! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 4 5*". "" In tallying t)e co%t o$ t)e attorney"client privilegeD ,tilitarian% traditionally %eiBe ,pon t)e evidentiary co%tD clai-ing t)at t)e privilege !%acri$iceK%L Kt)eL availability o$ evidence.! JetD to t)e e7tent t)at t)e privilege ind,ce% a client to reveal in$or-ation to )i% attorneyD it 3eep% $ro- t)e co,rt only %o,rce% o$ in$or-ation t)at 2o,ld not e7i%t 2it)o,t t)e privilege. A% t)e S,pre-e Co,rt )a% recogniBed' !Application o$ t)e attorney"client privilege . . . p,t% t)e adver%ary in no 2or%e po%ition t)an i$ t)e co--,nication% )ad never ta3en place.! T)ere$oreD t)e evidentiary co%t% are le%% 2eig)ty t)an ,tilitarian% )ave traditionally a%%,-ed. P#I%ILE"E ONL$ P#OTECTS INFO#3ATION T-AT WO2LD NOT OT-E#WISE )E DI%2L"ED (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;* Wig-ore advanced t)e prag-aticD albeit %pec,lativeD rationale t)at b,t $or t)e ab%ol,te g,arantee o$ privilegeD patient% or client% or penitent% 2o,ld not co--,nicate in$or-ation e%%ential $or t)eir relation%)ip to %,cceed. T),%D t)e
privilege -,%t be ab%ol,te and not %,bCect to e7ception% ba%ed on co,ntervailing intere%t% 2arranting di%clo%,re in %peci$ic %it,ation%. Wig-ore<% 2a% !a brig)t"line %tandard!.! It 2a% !co%t"$ree to t)e C,dicial %y%te- D! Pro$e%%or I-2in3elried %,gge%t%D beca,%e ,nder t)i% t)eory t)e privilege !%,ppre%%e% only evidence t)at 2o,ld not e7i%t b,t $or t)e privilege.!
*;
Attorney-Client Privilege Doe! Not Con lict 4it( Tr1t(See5ing, Narro4ly Tailored-Con identiality #e01ire&ent
CONFIDENTIALIT$ #E?2I#E3ENT LI3ITS P#I%ILE"E=S I3PACT ON NECESSA#$ E%IDENCE /elanie 8. Le!lie' La4 Pro e!!or-)en6a&in Cardo7o Sc(ool o La4' *+++' !T)e Co%t% o$ Con$identiality and t)e P,rpo%e o$ PrivilegeD! ;555 Wi%. #. (ev. 64D p. 6 "& (ice -i%%e% t)e point. T)e attorney"client privilege doe% not %ee3 to enco,rage attorney"client co--,nication at any price. (at)erD %c)olar% and co,rt% adC,dicating privilege i%%,e% )ave long %tr,ggled 2it) t)e ten%ion bet2een t)e need $or t)e privilege and t)e %,b%tantial co%t o$ %)ielding relevant evidence $ro- t)e $act $inder. T)e la2 o$ attorney"client privilege t)ere$ore contain% a n,-ber o$ re%triction% de%igned to narro2 t)e privilege<% application to e7cl,de a% little evidence a% po%%ible 2it)o,t deterring open co--,nication bet2een attorney and client. T)e con$identiality re+,ire-entD a% one %,c) re%trictionD %ee3% to en%,re t)at t)e privilege protect% only t)o%e attorney"client co--,nication% t)at 2o,ld not )ave been -ade ab%ent t)e privilege . It act% in oppo%ition to t)e privilege by %erving an i-portant li-iting $,nction. (ice<% -i%ta3e i% t)at )e a%%,-e% t)at t)e
rationale $or t)e r,le %)o,ld be t)e %a-e a% t)e rationale $or t)e e7ception.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E ONL$ CO%E#S CONFIDENTIAL CO332NICATIONS Pa,l C. "iannelli' La4 Pro e!!or-Ca!e We!tern #e!erve' *++/' @nder%tanding EvidenceD p. 14" T)e attorney"client privilege cover% only con'idential co--,nication%. T),%D 2)ere t)e in$or-ation co--,nicated i% intended to beco-e p,blicD t)e privilege i% inapplicable . Si-ilarlyD in$or-ation concerning a
de$endant<% obligation to appear $or trial or %entencing i% not !o$ a con$idential nat,re! and t),% not covered by t)e privilege.
T)e privilege doe% not apply 2)en t)e client<% action% are incon%i%tent 2it) an intention o$ con$identiality "" $or e7a-pleD i$ t)e co--,nication i% -ade in t)e pre%ence o$ a t)ird per%on. T)e pre%ence o$ o,t%ider% indicate% t)at con$identiality 2a% not intended. Con$identiality 2ill be con%idered pre%ervedD )o2ever 2)ere t)e t)ird
per%on i% a%%i%ting in t)e legal con%,ltationD %,c) a% t)e ca%e 2it) legal %ecretarie%D inve%tigator%D and paralegal a%%i%tant%. In %o-e ca%e%D t)e privilege i% retained 2)en a %po,%eD parentD or b,%ine%% a%%ociate i% pre%ent. A% long a% t)e client did not 3no2 o$ t)e pre%ence o$ an eave%dropper 2)en t)e co--,nication too3 placeD and t)e client too3 rea%onable %tep% to pre%erve con$identialityD t)e privilege re-ain% and t)e eave%dropper -ay be pro)ibited $rote%ti$ying abo,t 2)at 2a% over)eard.
*6
Attorney-Client Privilege Doe! Not Con lict 4it( Tr1t(See5ing, Co1rt! Care 1lly Weig( Co!t!F)ene it!
CO2#TS -A%E 3ET-OD FO# WEI"-IN" )ENEFITS AND LI3ITIN" -A#3 TO T#2T-SEE8IN" (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. 6; @nder t)e pre%ent approac) in A-ericaD privilege% are not $avored and -ay be C,%ti$ied only i$ t)ere i% a tran%cendent p,blic good t)at o,t2eig)% t)e %earc) $or tr,t). In deter-ining 2)et)er t)ere i% %,c) a p,blic goodD co,rt% %)o,ld con%ider 2)et)er t)ere i% an !i-perative need $or con$identiality!I 2)et)er !p,blic end%! 2o,ld be %ervedI 2)et)er t)e evidentiary co%t 2o,ld be -ode%tI and 2)et)er any $ederal r,le 2o,ld )ave a negative i-pact on %tate practice% . T)i% approac) i% rea%onableD and i% ba%ed on )i%torical ideal o$ t)e $ederal %y%te- t)at t)e
%tate% 2o,ld be ver%atile C,ri%pr,dential engineer% o$ %ocial policie%.
P#I%ILE"E IS WEI"-ED A"AINST COSTS -- NOT A)SOL2TE (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &4 No negative in$erence -ay be dra2n $ro- a client<% in%i%tence on t)e %ecrecy o$ )i% con$idential co--,nication% 2it) co,n%elI t)ere %)o,ld be no %,gge%tion t)at t)e in$or-ation privileged 2o,ld be ,n$avorable to t)e client. T)ere are e7ception%""in ca%e% o$ pro%pective cri-e or $ra,dD $or e7a-ple""and t)ey are noted in bar r,le% and code% o$ et)ic%. T)e privilege i% +,ali$iedD not ab%ol,te.
*4
Attorney-Client Privilege En(ance! Tr1t(-See5ing

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E EN-ANCES T#2T--SEE8IN" Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6 ."1 T)e barD )o2everD )a% relied on ot)er C,%ti$ication% $or con$identiality. 8y enco,raging client% to co--,nicate in$or-ation t)ey 2o,ld ot)er2i%e 2it))old $ro- t)eir la2yer%D con$identiality en)ance% t)e +,ality o$ legal repre%entation and t),% )elp% prod,ce acc,rate legal verdict%. Proponent% al%o clai- t)at con$identiality i-prove% t)e attorney"client relation%)ip . It can $o%ter a%pect% o$ la2yer and client !dignity.! AndD in t)eoryD con$identiality )elp% la2yer% di%cover i-proprietie% t)at t)e client plan%D advi%e again%t t)e-D and ,lti-ately %top t)e -i%cond,ct.
Privilege Fail! to Increa!e Tr1t(-See5ing

P#I%ILE"E DOES NOT ENCO2#A"E 3O#E T#2T-F2L STATE3ENTS (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;;* T)e rationale $or e7cl,ding certain cla%%e% o$ val,ableD o$ten cr,cialD evidence i% t)at %,c) evidence derive% $rorelation%)ip% t)at %,ppo%edly co,ld not e7i%t i$ t)e partie% to t)e- co,ld not be a%%,red o$ t)e con$identiality o$ t)eir revelation%. T)at pre-i%e )a% been c)allenged by 3no2ledgeable practicing pro$e%%ional% and by critic% o$ t)e%e privilege%. Sic3 patient% 2ill di%c,%% t)eir proble-% 2it) t)eir doctor%D ),%band% 2ill tal3 to 2ive%D anony-o,% %o,rce% 2ill tal3 to reporter%D even i$ t)ey 3no2 t)at t)eir co--,nication% -ig)t be -ade p,blicD t)o,g) t)ey 2o,ld %,rely pre$er ot)er2i%e. An e7perienced C,ri%t $ear% t)at 2it)o,t a privilege partie% 2ill di%clo%e $act% %electively to doctor% and attorney%D 2)ic) 2ill re%,lt in inappropriate treat-ent or advice ba%ed on inco-plete data. Cynic% 2onder i$ client% and patient% tell t)e 2)ole tr,t) even 2)en t)ey pre%,-e t)at t)eir co--,nication% are con$idential.
*&
#e!tricting Attorney-Client Privilege Doe!n=t Increa!e Tr1t( See5ing, Ot(er Privilege!

LAW #ECO"NIBES I3PO#TANCE OF P#OTECTIN" CONFIDENTIALIT$ IN A %A#IET$ OF #ELATIONS-IPS (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;4" :i%toricallyD %tate %ecret% involving national de$en%e and international relation% 2ere protected. In additionD %everal cla%%e% o$ relation%)ip% )ave been con%idered %o %pecial t)at t)e la2 dee-ed it i-proper to intr,de on t)eir con$identialityI con$idential relation%)ip% bet2een clergy and t)eir pari%)ioner%D bet2een la2yer% and t)eir client%D bet2een doctor% and t)eir patient%D and bet2een ),%band% and 2ive%. T)e rationale $or protecting t)e %anctity o$ co--,nication% 2it)in t)e%e privileged relation%)ip% 2a% obvio,% and rea%onableI t)ere 2a% dee-ed to be a %ocial intere%t in protecting t)e con$identiality o$ t)e%e conver%ation% %o t)at t)e%e inti-ate relation%)ip% co,ld t)rive. In t)e%e li-ited %it,ation%D privacy 2a% -ore e7alted t)an t)e %earc) $or tr,t) in civil and cri-inal ca%e%. @nder t)e co--on la2 and vario,% %tat,te%D Anglo"A-erican la2 )a% traditionally )onored t)e privileged
con$identiality in t)e%e %pecial %it,ation%.
**
#e!tricting Attorney-Client Privilege Doe!n=t Increa!e Tr1t( See5ing, Alternate Ca1!alitie!

PLEA )A#"AININ" 2NDE#3INES T#2T- SEE8IN" T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. .* W)atever )appened to t)e tr,t) in t)e cri-inal"C,%tice %y%te-F We tolerate t)e idea o$ p,tting people in Cail $or cri-e% $or 2)ic) t)ey 2ere 2illing to plead g,ilty b,t 2)ic) t)ey did not co--it. Tr,t) beco-e% )o%tage to t)e e$$iciencie% gained $ro- negotiated plea%. In $actD it i% t)e ,ntold tr,t)% t)at 2e %entence to CailD not C,%t t)e cri-inal% t)e-%elve%. We incarcerate tr,t) and re2ard -endacity. Cri-inal% are be)ind bar%D b,t ,nder very $al%e
preten%e%. T)e tr,t) )a% been p,ni%)ed even -ore %everely""loc3ed ,p in %olitary con$ine-entD $orever. Indeed a% part o$ t)e plea bargainD cri-inal de$endant% are not re+,ired to te%ti$y a% to 2)at t)ey didD or even to %)o2 re-or%e. And
in %o-e ca%e%D de$endant% 2)o are co-pletely innocent plead g,ilty beca,%e t)ey )ave been pre%%,red into doing %o by pro%ec,tor% 2)o )ave t)reatened t)e- 2it) even -ore %evere penaltie% %)o,ld t)e ca%e act,ally proceed to trial and t)e de$endant i% $o,nd g,ilty. WEA8 PE#>2#$ SANCTIONS 2NDE#3INES T#2T--SEE8IN" IN T-E >2STICE S$STE3 T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 45&"* T)e legal %y%te- )a% a )ig) tolerance $or lyingD and it doe%n<t %ee- too concerned abo,t t)e p,blic<% gro2ing cynici%- t)at C,%tice lac3% t)e in%tit,tional integrity to root o,t lie%. T)e la2 accept% virt,al tr,t)% $or act,al tr,t)%D %tate-ent% t)at are ad-ittedly and intentionally -i%leading. T)ey are not tec)nically perC,ro,% b,t not entirely tr,eD eit)er. T)e b,rden i% placed on t)e e7a-ining attorney to get to t)e tr,t) by a%3ing t)e rig)t +,e%tion%. And i$ t)e 2itne%% i% -ore clever t)an t)e attorneyD and an%2er% in an eva%iveD elliptical -annerD %o be it .
Con%i%tent 2it) t)e conventional legal paradig-D 2it) it% %porting"conte%tD 2inner"ta3e"all gro,nd r,le%D C,dge% and la2yer% believe t)at it i% ,lti-ately t)e Cob o$ t)e C,ry to a%certain t)e tr,t). T)ey are t)e $inder% o$ $act. T)ey are t)e one% re%pon%ible $or C,dging t)e credibility o$ 2itne%%e%. It al-o%t doe%n<t -atter 2)et)er 2itne%%e% are lying or telling t)e tr,t)D beca,%e t)e
$inality o$ t)e trial 2ill re%,lt in $inding% o$ $act%D and t)o%e $act% 2ill %tand in $or t)e tr,t)D even i$ t)ey 2ere derived $ro- lie%. E%IDENCE #2LES AND CO2#T#OO3 P#OCED2#ES F#2ST#ATE T#2T- SEE8IN" T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 45*". For t)e -o%t partD evidence r,le% are %een a% e%%ential to t)e proper and digni$ied 2or3ing% o$ a trial or )earing. T)ey narro2 t)e %cope o$ t)e in+,iryD %i-pli$y i%%,e% and narrative%D %et bo,ndarie%. T)ey en%,re t)at 2)at get% pre%ented in%ide t)e co,rtroo-D and 2)at t)e C,ry can per-i%%ibly )earD con$or-% to a %et o$ e$$icient ad-ini%trative r,le% t)at -anage t)e proceeding% and a%%i%t in C,%tice. 8,t t)e%e e$$iciency"%aving val,e% al%o %everely ,nder-ine tr,t) and %torytelling. IndeedD in li-iting t)e %cope o$ t)e narrativeD evidence r,le% only allo2 %o -,c) o$ t)e %tory to be told. W)en citiBen% co-e be$ore t)e la2D t)ey 2i%) to %pea3D and t)ey don<t 2i%) to be interr,pted 2)en doing %o. T)ey al%o )ave no preconceived notion o$ t)e order in 2)ic) t)e %tory %)o,ld be relayed. T)ey -ay be reliableD yet entirely di%organiBed 2itne%%e% . And %ince trial% are
e-otionally ta7ingD and partie% appear in co,rt at t)eir -o%t v,lnerableD t)ey tend to repeat t)e-%elve% on t)e 2itne%% %tand. We -ay %2ear on t)e 8ibleD or %i-ply %2ear to tell to t)e tr,t)D b,t a$ter t)atD o,r re%pon%e% are not al2ay% %o -ea%,redD con$identD and clear. Nervo,%ne%% and an7iety are cr,cial to t)e 2itne%%<% de-eanor.
E%IDENCE #2LES AND O)>ECTIONS F#2ST#ATE T#2T--SEE8IN" T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 45."1 T)e%e obCection%D a%ide $ro- being r,de and in%,ltingD al%o li-it t)e %tory and rob it o$ all t)e n,ance and e-otion o$ t)e ),-an e7perience. W)at 3ind o$ a legal %y%te- %ay% to people te%ti$ying ,nder oat)D rig)t in $ront o$ t)eir $ace%D a% i$ t)ey are not t)ere )earing t)e interr,ptionD t)at t)eir 2ord% are !irrelevantD! or 2or%eD !not credible!"" %i-ply not be believedF Evidence r,le% t,rn t)e entire co,rtroo- proceeding into %o-et)ing $rigidly coldD arti$icialD and %taid. T)i% i% ab%,rdD given t)at co,rtroo-% are $illed 2it) people at t)eir -o%t ani-atedD aliveD and in$initely
nervo,%. In lig)t o$ t)e e7tre-eD ra2 e-otion% t)at attend t)e%e proceeding%D yo, 2o,ld t)in3 t)at t)e legal %y%te- 2o,ld )ave $ig,red o,t by no2 t)atD -orallyD yo, can<t t,rn te%ti-ony on and o$$ 2it) a %2itc). I$ t)e 2)ole point o$ t)e trial i% to
deter-ine t)e tr,t) by allo2ing people to de%cribeD in t)eir o2n 2ord%D 2)at )appenedD t)en 2)y are t)e
*.
r,le% governing evidence %o co--itted to telling people to %),t ,pD t)at t)e -anner and order in 2)ic) t)ey are %pea3ingD and it% pre%cribed relevancyD i% -ore i-portant t)an 2)at t)ey )ave to %ayF E9CL2SIONA#$ #2LE 2NDE#3INES T#2T--SEE8IN" To- Stacy' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity o 8an!a!' ://:' !T)e Searc) $or Tr,t) in Con%tit,tional Cri-inal Proceeding%D! 14 Col,-. #. (ev. 46&1D p. 46*4 So-e rig)t%D appropriately c)aracteriBed a% tr,t)"i-pairingD deliberately %,bordinate acc,rate adC,dication to ot)er val,e%. T)e Fo,rt) A-end-ent pro)ibition again%t ,nrea%onable %earc)e% and %eiB,re%D t)e -o%t pro-inent e7a-pleD protect% privacy at t)e e7pen%e o$ t)e %earc) $or t)e tr,t). T)i% pro)ibition -a3e% it -ore di$$ic,ltD and %o-eti-e% i-po%%ibleD $or la2 en$orce-ent o$$icial% to obtain evidence o$ cri-inal 2rongdoing. So long a% it i% obeyedD t)e A-end-ent )a% t)e e$$ect o$ 2it))olding relevant evidence $ro- t)e cri-inal adC,dicatory proce%%. E%IDENCE #2LES P#ECL2DE CONTE9T NECESSA#$ FO# T#2T- SEE8IN" T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 44;"6 Evidence r,le% -aintain %,c) a tig)t lid on t)e %tory t)at trial% lo%e t)eir co--on -eaning a% place% 2)ere tr,t)% are )onored and told. T)e %tory beco-e% incidental to t)e ad-ini%tration o$ legal C,%tice. I$ 2e end ,p )earing t)e entire taleD it<% -ore by 2ay o$ accident t)an de%ign. Storie% are introd,ced and redacted in %ynt)e%i% aloneD t)e cold Cli$$<% Note% ver%ion rat)er t)an t)e director<% c,t. Far $ro- being an open $or,-D co,rtroo-% are place% 2)ere 2e are -o%tly told to %),t ,pD to %top tal3ing. (elevancy beco-e% an entirely e7ternal proce%%. It<% not 2)at yo, 2ant to %ay b,t 2)at 2e need to )ear. Storie% are dee-ed ,%e$,l only in re%olving t)e legal i%%,e%D 2it)o,t elaboration or repetitionD and
2it)o,t any con%ideration o$ ),-an $eeling%. T)ey )ave a li-ited p,rpo%e at trial "" to %erve t)e la2 rat)er t)an t)e ot)er 2ay aro,nd.
E%IDENCE #2LES DISTO#T T-E T#2T- )$ FILTE#IN" O2T S2)>ECTI%E I3P#ESSIONS T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4 5 Evidence r,le% are o$ten ,%ed to de$eat t)e te%ti-ony o$ 2itne%%e% 2)o are eit)er partie% to t)e actionD or are dee-ed too e-otionally and %,bCectively involved to %pea3 $act,al tr,t)%. 8eca,%e o$ t)e general a%%a,lt on %,bCectivity in t)e la2D t)e in$or-ation t)e%e 2itne%%e% po%%e%% i%n<t ta3en %erio,%lyD and i% ignored legally. W)at t)e legal %y%te- 2ant% are eye2itne%%e% 2)o%e eye% re-ain clear o$ %,bCective inter$erence. 8,t in rooting o,t 2)at 2o,ld e7i%t any2ay""in nat,reD in t)e ),-an %o,l""co,rtroo-% are deprived o$ eye2itne%% veracityD tr,t)% o$ t)e be%t 3ind preci%ely beca,%e t)ey involve t)e direct reco,nting o$ an eventD along 2it) t)e %i-,ltaneo,% e-otion o$ )aving a li$e radically ,pended and altered. FIFT- A3END3ENT P#OTECTION A"AINST SELF-INC#I3INATION F#2ST#ATES T#2T--SEE8IN" To- Stacy' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity o 8an!a!' ://:' !T)e Searc) $or Tr,t) in Con%tit,tional Cri-inal Proceeding%D! 14 Col,-. #. (ev. 46&1D p. 46*&"* T)e Privilege Again%t Sel$"Incri-ination. "" T)e Fi$t) A-end-ent provide% t)at !KnLo per%on . . . %)all be co-pelled in any cri-inal ca%e to be a 2itne%% again%t )i-%el$.! In partD t)e privilege again%t %el$"incri-ination -ay be ,nder%tood a% a tr,t)"$,rt)ering g,arantee. It in%,re% t)at cri-inal conviction% are not ba%ed on co-pelled con$e%%ion%D 2)ic) are le%% li3ely to be tr,%t2ort)y t)an vol,ntary one%. 8,t t)e privilegeD li3e t)e Fo,rt) A-end-entD al%o re$lect% a tr,t)"i-pairing concern $or privacy "" $or !t)e inviolability o$ t)e ),-an per%onality and o$ t)e rig)t o$ eac) individ,al <to a private enclave 2)ere )e -ay lead a private li$e.<! No -atter )o2 relevant )er
3no2ledgeD t)e de$endant )a% an ab%ol,te rig)t not to te%ti$y at trialD and t)e pro%ec,tion i% precl,ded $ro- ,%ing a coerced con$e%%ion 2)o%e reliability i% beyond di%p,te.
P#OTECTION A"AINST DO2)LE >EOPA#D$ F#2ST#ATES T#2T- SEE8IN" To- Stacy' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity o 8an!a!' ://:' !T)e Searc) $or Tr,t) in Con%tit,tional Cri-inal Proceeding%D! 14 Col,-. #. (ev. 46&1D p. 46.5"4
Do,ble 9eopardy. "" T)e Do,ble 9eopardy Cla,%e %tate% t)at no per%on %)all !be %,bCect $or t)e %a-e o$$ence to be t2ice p,t in Ceopardy o$ li$e or li-b.! #i3e t)e privilege again%t %el$"incri-inationD t)e ai- o$ t)e do,ble Ceopardy pro)ibition i% in part tr,t)"$,rt)ering. 8y barring repeated atte-pt% to convict a per%on $or t)e %a-e o$$en%eD t)e Cla,%e di-ini%)e% t)e po%%ibility t)at an innocent per%on 2ill be $o,nd g,ilty. 8,t t)e Do,ble 9eopardy Cla,%e al%o protect% t)e
tr,t)"i-pairing val,e o$ relieving t)e acc,%ed o$ t)e !e-barra%%-entD e7pen%eD . . . and an7iety and

in%ec,rity! o$ repeated trial%. A de$endant t),% -ay not be retried even a$ter an !egregio,%ly erroneo,%! ac+,ittal.
*1
STAT2TE OF LI3ITATIONS 2NDE#3INE T#2TT)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 466 Tr,t) %)o,ld never be ti-e"barred. Jet t)ere are tr,t)% t)at never co-e to lig)tD and inC,%tice% t)at go ,ncorrectedD all beca,%e o$ li-itation% placed on t)e ti-e period in 2)ic) la2%,it% can be bro,g)t. So-e o$ t)e%e %tat,te% o$ li-itation vary by %tate or by t)e type o$ action being conte-platedD b,t t)e ba%ic principle re-ain% t)e %a-e' A$ter a certain period o$ ti-eD i$ t)e ca%e )a% not yet been $iledD t)e clai-ant i% prevented by t)e pa%%age o$ ti-e $ro- doing %o.
.5
D1e Proce!! Protection! O1t4eig( Any -ar& to Tr1t( See5ing Fro& Attorney-Client Privilege
T#2T--SEE8IN" "OAL DOES NOT T#23P INDI%ID2AL #I"-TS P#OTECTED )$ ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E /ic)ael 8. Da!(6ian' La4 St1dent' :/;*' !T)e Attorney"Client Privilege and t)e Cri-inal De$endant<% Con%tit,tional (ig)t%D! Cali$ornia #a2 (evie2D 9,lyD *5 Cali$. #. (ev. 454.D p. 45&4" T)e %tate<% intere%t in tr,t)"%ee3ing cannot %,pport t)e re%triction o$ con%tit,tional rig)t% $o,nd in /eredit). T)e $i$t) a-end-ent protection again%t %el$"incri-ination i% nece%%ary to protect individ,al liberty $rogovern-ent ab,%e even t)o,g) t)i% nece%%arily re%trict% t)e %tate in it% tr,t)"%ee3ing. /oreoverD it i% a ba%ic tenet o$ t)e co--on la2 %y%te- t)at on balanceD e$$ective a%%i%tance o$ co,n%el advance%D rat)er t)an i-pede%D t)e %earc) $or tr,t). FinallyD to en%,re t)at no one i% alone in de$ending a cri-inal c)arge pro%ec,ted by t)e govern-ent<% va%t re%o,rce%D %ociety %)o,ld -aintain t)e privacy o$ t)e attorney"client relation%)ip in %pite o$ any perceived t)reat% to t)e %earc) $or tr,t)' Tr,t) li3e all ot)er good t)ing% -ay be loved ,n2i%elyD -ay be p,r%,ed too 3eenlyD -ay co%t too -,c) . And %,rely t)e -eanne%%D and t)e -i%c)ie$ o$ prying into a -an<% con$idential co--,nication% 2it) )i% legal advi%erD t)e general evil o$ in$,%ing re%erve and di%%i-,lationD ,nea%ine%% and %,%picion and $earD into t)e%e co--,nication% 2)ic) -,%t ta3e placeD and 2)ic)D ,nle%% in a condition o$ per$ect %ec,rityD -,%t ta3e place ,%ele%%ly or 2or%eD are too great a price to pay $or tr,t) it%el$. T),%D i$ privilege% e7i%t to a$$ord nece%%ary %a$eg,ard% to t)o%e 2)o -,%t ,%e t)e legal %y%te-D t)en %o-eti-e% t)e tr,t)"%ee3ing $,nction -,%t give 2ay to t)o%e %a$eg,ard% . StillD t)e concl,%ion% %o $ar reac)edD 2)ile
protecting t)e attorney"client privilegeD %)o2 only t)at t)e de$en%e -,%t be allo2ed to re-ove and %t,dy evidence 2it)o,t penalty. T)ey do not %)o2 2)at t)e de$en%e %)o,ld do 2it) t)e evidence once it i% %t,diedD or 2)et)er it i% po%%ible to avoid irreparable da-age to t)e pro%ec,tion<% ability to inve%tigate t)e ca%e 2)ile -aintaining t)e privilege. T)ere i%D )o2everD a %ol,tion to t)e proble2)ic) en%,re% t)at only -ini-alD %pec,lative )ar- 2ill be done to t)e !%earc) $or tr,t)! 2)ile -aintaining t)e attorney"client privilege and t)e individ,al con%tit,tional rig)t% ,nderlying it.
CONSENS2S T-AT T-E )ENEFITS OF P#I%ILE"E O2TWEI"- T-E COSTS =race /. "ie!el' La4 Pro e!!or-)randei! Sc(ool o La4' *+:+' !@pCo)n Warning%D t)e Attorney"Client PrivilegeD and t)e Principle% o$ #a2yer Et)ic%""Ac)ieving :ar-onyD & @. /ia-i #. (ev. 451D p. 4;*". T)e generally recogniBed co%t o$ t)e privilege i% t)at applying t)e privilege in a partic,lar %it,ation -ay 3eep relevant evidence a2ay $ro- t)e tr,t)"$inder. T)i% co%t probably i% le%% t)an one -ig)t i-agine beca,%e t)e privilege protect% co--,nication% bet2een client and la2yerD b,t doe% not protect t)e $act% ,nderlying t)e co--,nication%. Even 2it) t)i% do2n%ideD t)e attorney"client privilege )a% been an accepted creat,re o$ t)e la2 $or cent,rie%. T)i% acceptance indicate% a %)ared belie$ t)at t)e bene$it% o$ t)e privilege ,lti-ately o,t2eig) t)e co%t%. JetD co,rt% recogniBe and $ear t)e ob%tr,ction o$ t)e tr,t) t)at t)e attorney"client privilege -ay ca,%e. A% a re%,ltD co,rt% )ave !%trictly con$ined Kt)e privilegeL 2it)in t)e narro2e%t po%%ible li-it% con%i%tent 2it) t)e logic o$ it% principle.! A% a @nited State% Di%trict Co,rt $or t)e Di%trict o$ Ne2 9er%ey recently %tated' W)ile it i% tr,e t)at t)e attorney"client privilege i% narro2ly con%tr,ed beca,%e it !ob%tr,ct% t)e tr,t)" $inding proce%%D! t)e privilege i% not !di%$avored .! Co,rt% %)o,ld be ca,tio,% in t)eir application o$ t)e privilege -ind$,l
t)at !it protect% only t)o%e di%clo%,re% nece%%ary to obtain in$or-ed legal advice 2)ic) -ig)t not )ave been -ade ab%ent t)e privilege.! In all in%tance%D t)e $act% ,nderlying any given co--,nication re-ain di%coverable. Placing t)e b,rden on t)e clai-er to prove t)e applicability o$ t)e privilege al%o re$lect% a )ealt)y %3eptici%- o$ it.
)ENEFITS OF P#I%ILE"E O2TWEI"- T-E COSTS David A. Nel!on' La4 St1dent - Nort(4e!tern' ://*' !Attorney"Client Privilege and Proced,ral Sa$eg,ard%' Are T)ey Wort) t)e Co%t%F!D .& N2. @. #. (ev 6&.D p. 6.6"4
T)e attorney"client privilege i% t)e olde%t o$ all t)e con$idential privilege%. T)e Engli%) co,rt% $ir%t recogniBed t)e privilege in t)e 4 55%. Alt)o,g) created to protect t)e attorney $ro- $orced violation o$ )i% oat) o$ %ecrecy to t)e clientD it i% no2 2ell e%tabli%)ed t)at
t)e p,rpo%e be)ind t)e privilege i% to pro-ote $,ll and open co--,nication bet2een t)e attorney and client. A% a re%,lt o$ t)i% co--,nicationD an attorney 2ill be better able to repre%ent )i% client in a co-petent -anner. T)e attorney"client privilege al%o pro-ote% !broader p,blic intere%t% in t)e ob%ervance o$ la2 and ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice! by providing t)e attorney and client 2it) a con$idential $or,- in 2)ic) to co--,nicate and re%olve t)e client<% proble-. W)ile t)e privilege -ay %,ppre%% i-portant evidenceD it )a% been deter-ined t)at t)e need to allo2 t)e attorney to provide %o,nd legal advice generally o,t2eig)% any

corner%tone% o$ o,r C,dicial %y%te-.
.4
di%advantage o$ 2it))olding evidence in a partic,lar ca%e. For t)e%e rea%on%D t)e attorney"client privilege i% one o$ t)e
.;
Pre!1&ption Again!t A.rogating Privilege

P#ES23PTION WIT- P#OTECTIN" P#I%ILE"E (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;64 T),%D t)e la2 %)o,ld enco,rage and protect con$identiality a% -,c) a% po%%ible. A%%ociation% "" pro$e%%ional and ot)er% "" t)at )ave r,le% governing con$identiality %)o,ld en$orce t)e-. Private con$identiality agree-ent% D e7plicit or i-plicit ,nder t)e circ,-%tance%D %)o,ld be en$orced ,nle%% t)ere are overriding p,blic"policy rea%on% $or breac)ing %,c) agree-ent%.
.6
2tilitariani!& >1!ti ie! Attorney-Client Privilege

2TILITA#IANIS3 >2STIFIES ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E -- )ENEFITS O2TWEI"-A#3S T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. &1"*5 (at)erD t)e 2idely acceptedD overarc)ing p,rpo%e $or t)e -odern attorney"client privilege i% ,tilitarian or in%tr,-ental. T)e predo-inant -odern rationale $or t)e privilege i% t)at it $o%ter% client candor and $,ll co--,nication bet2een attorney% and client%D 2)ic) prod,ce %ocial bene$it% t)at o,t2eig) t)e privilege<% %ocial co%t%. T)e S,pre-e Co,rt )a% ,na-big,o,%ly endor%ed t)i% vie2' KT)e privilege<%L p,rpo%e i% to enco,rage $,ll and $ran3 co--,nication bet2een attorney% and t)eir client% and t)ereby pro-ote broader p,blic intere%t% in t)e ob%ervance o$ la2 and ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice . T)e
privilege recogniBe% t)at %o,nd legal advice or advocacy %erve% p,blic end% and t)at %,c) advice or advocacy depend% ,pon t)e la2yer<% being $,lly in$or-ed by t)e client. Corre%pondinglyD 2it)o,t t)e attorney"client privilegeD t)e arg,-ent goe%D client% 2o,ld be deterred $ro- -a3ing open and candid di%clo%,re% to t)eir attorney%. Ab%ent rea%onable a%%,rance t)at %,c) di%clo%,re% co,ld not be ,%ed again%t t)e- later " via t)eir attorney<% te%ti-ony or ot)er2i%e " client% 2o,ld be ,n2illing to di%clo%e e-barra%%ingD ,nplea%antD or ot)er2i%e )ar-$,l $act%.
F2LL 2TILITA#IAN )ALANCIN" >2STIFIES )#OAD ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' III. Attorney Client Privilege! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 4 54" T)e ,tilitarian and non",tilitarian C,%ti$ication% o$ t)e privilege are not a% irreconcilable a% t)eir proponent% i-ply. In $actD t)e traditional concern% o$ non",tilitarian% can be incorporated 2it)in a broad ,tilitarian $ra-e2or3 t)at ta3e% acco,nt o$ t)e $,ll range o$ bene$it% to 2)ic) t)e attorney"client privilege give% ri%e. T)i% $,ll ,tilitariani%- i% -ore con%i%tent 2it) t)e principle o$ 2eig)ing all %ocial bene$it% t)an i% t)e balancing traditionally done by privilege ,tilitarian%D beca,%e $,ll ,tilitariani%- con%ider% additional bene$it% t)at accr,e $ro- t)e attain-ent o$ t)e rig)t% val,ed by t)e non",tilitarian%. F,ll ,tilitariani%- i% al%o con%i%tent 2it) non",tilitarian principle% beca,%e it ta3e% acco,nt o$ t)e relative 2eig)t o$ t)e vario,% rig)t% 2it) 2)ic) non",tilitarian% are concerned. T)i% S,b%ection ,nderta3e% a $,ll ,tilitarian balancing o$ t)e co%t% and bene$it% o$ t)e attorney" client privilege and arg,e% t)at t)i% approac) C,%ti$ie% a broad application o$ t)e privilege e7cept 2)en it protect% client% 2)o rely on attorney% to $,rt)er pro%pective cri-e or $ra,d.
.4
Attorney-Client Privilege "ro1nded in 2tilitarian and Non2tilitarian >1!ti ication!

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E >2STIFIED T-#O2"- 2TILITA#IANIS3 AND #I"-TS -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' III. Attorney Client Privilege! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 4 54
T)e attorney"client privilege )a% $or %o long been tr,-peted a% t)e olde%t o$ t)e interper%onal co--,nication privilege% t)at t)e pre%ent"day i%%,e !i% not 2)et)er it %)o,ld e7i%tD b,t preci%ely 2)at it% ter-% %)o,ld be.! Nonet)ele%%D debate over 2)y t)e privilege %)o,ld e7i%t )a% contin,ed t)ro,g)o,t it% )i%tory to t)e pre%ent ti-e. T2o principal t)eorie% )ave been advanced to C,%ti$y t)e attorney"client privilege. One C,%ti$ication i% ba%ed on ,tilitarian principle% and 2o,ld privilege
attorney"client co--,nication% only i$ doing %o 2o,ld create a degree o$ %ocial good t)at o,t2eig)% t)e )ar- t)at it 2o,ld do to t)e C,dicial %y%te-<% $act"$inding proce%%. T)e ot)er C,%ti$ication i% non",tilitarian and 2o,ld privilege attorney"client co--,nication% not beca,%e o$ any bene$icial con%e+,ence% t)at can be ac)ieved t)ro,g) t)e privilegeD b,t beca,%e co-pelled di%clo%,re o$ attorney"client co--,nication% i% it%el$ intrin%ically 2rong in certain circ,-%tance%. T)i% non",tilitarian C,%ti$ication o$ten ta3e% t)e $or- o$ a t)eory o$ rig)t%. P#I%ILE"ES SE#%E )OT- P#A"3ATIC AND -23ANISTIC ENDS (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;;* Eli-inating t)e%e privilege% -ig)t di%co,rage ot)er co-peting val,e%""bot) prag-atic and ),-ani%tic""t)at are al%o re$lective o$ o,r de-ocratic %y%te- . Prag-aticD beca,%e t)ey are con%idered nece%%ary to enco,rage relation%)ip% dee-ed i-portant eno,g) to 2arrant inc,r%ion% on t)e %earc) $or tr,t) at trial. :,-ani%ticD beca,%e t)ey re$lect a %ocial val,e %y%te- t)at re%pect% ),-an a,tono-y and t)e need $or Bone% or enclave% o$ privacy t)at are protected $ro- inva%ion%. T)e prag-atic approac) )a% been ba%ed on a +,e%tionable be)avioral
a%%,-ptionI t)e ),-ani%tic rationale i% ba%ed on a val,able nor-ative a%%,-ption.
Attorney-Client Privilege 8ey to >1!t and 3oral Sy!te&

SOCIET$ -AS AN INTE#EST IN P#OTECTIN" T-E P#I%ILE"E T-AT IS 8E$ TO A >2ST AND 3O#AL S$STE3 (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &4 In addition to t)e !in%tr,-ental! rationaleD 2)ic) arg,e% t)at 2it)o,t t)e attorney"client privilege client% 2o,ld not con%,lt attorney%D i% t)e !),-ani%tic! rationale. So-e %c)olar% contend t)at per%onal a,tono-y or privacyD %o-e ba%ic %en%e o$ decencyD i% 2)at i% at %ta3e in t)e attorney"client privilege . T)e in+,iry %)o,ld be -adeD one treati%e %,gge%t%D abo,t 2)at 3ind o$ %ociety 2o,ld e-po2er co,rt% to co-pel inti-ate% to betray t)eir tr,%t% . A% $id,ciary agent% o$ t)eir client%D attorney% )ave a d,ty o$ loyalty to t)e-D and %ociety )a% an intere%t in t)i% %ocial inve%t-ent in a C,%t and -oral %y%te- .
.&
Attorney-Client Privilege 8ey to >1!tice

F2LL AND F#AN8 ATTO#NE$-CLIENT CO332NICATION ESSENTIAL TO >2STICE T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. *5
In addition to %erving t)e independent intere%t% de%cribed aboveD $,ll client di%clo%,re and t)e corre%ponding interc)ange bet2een attorney and client p,rportedly prod,ce %everal %ocial bene$it%. Fir%tD $,ll and $ran3 co--,nication i% nece%%ary $or t)e provi%ion o$ e$$ective legal repre%entation. In t)e litigation conte7tD $or e7a-pleD attorney% ot)er2i%e 2o,ld be
deprived o$ in$or-ation nece%%ary $or t)e preparation and anticipation o$ clai-% and de$en%e%D 2)ic) 2o,ld )ar- bot) t)e client<% intere%t% and t)e adver%arial proce%%. T)e vindication o$ rig)t% inD and overall e$$icacy o$D o,r C,%tice %y%te- o$ten depend% on %o,nd and ade+,ate legal advice and a%%i%tance . O,t%ide t)e litigation
conte7tD candid interc)ange bet2een attorney and client i% nece%%ary to a%%e%% legal ri%3% and con%e+,ence%D and to allo2 co,n%eling in avoidance o$ ri%3%D adver%e con%e+,ence%D and litigation in o,r -odernD co-ple7 reg,latory regi-e.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E P#O3OTES P2)LIC INTE#EST IN F2#T-E#IN" T-E AD3INIST#ATION OF >2STICE Ada- /. C(1d' La4 St1dent' :///' !In De$en%e o$ t)e =overn-ent Attorney"Client PrivilegeD! .4 Cornell #. (ev. 4&.;D p. 4&.."1 T)e attorney"client privilege i% t)e olde%t $ederal te%ti-onial privilege. A% t)e S,pre-e Co,rt )a% notedD t)e la2 traditionally )a% e7e-pted con$idential di%c,%%ion% bet2een la2yer and client $rodi%clo%,re !to enco,rage $,ll and $ran3 co--,nication bet2een attorney% and t)eir client% and t)ereby pro-ote broader p,blic intere%t% in t)e ob%ervance o$ la2 and ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice.! Proponent% o$ t)e attorney"client privilege believe t)at it i-prove% t)e +,ality o$ t)e co--,nication% bet2een la2yer and client and t)ere$ore i-prove% t)e +,ality o$ t)e legal advice client% receive. I$ client% )e%itate to %pea3 openly 2it) t)eir attorney%D la2yer% cannot acc,rately in$or- client% o$ t)eir legal obligation% and advi%e t)e- o$ t)e be%t 2ay to -eet t)o%e obligation%. T)i% la2 co-pliance $,nctionD t)e S,pre-e Co,rt )a% %aidD %erve% t)e p,blic<% intere%t. CO3PLE9IT$ OF LE"AL S$STE3 NECESSITATES P#I%ILE"E FO# >2ST O2TCO3ES (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &;"6 Once b,%ine%% re+,ired t)e involve-ent o$ pro$e%%ional% trained in t)e ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice and C,ri%pr,denceD it beca-e nece%%ary t)at citiBen% be able to con%,lt 2it) t)eir %3illed repre%entative% and $eel %a$e t)at in doing %o t)eir private t)o,g)t% and re-ar3% 2o,ld be protected $rodi%clo%,re. !T)e co--,nication -,%t be privileged to t)e ,t-o%t e7tentD or it 2ill not be -adeD! an 4.6* ca%e declared. And t)e privilege covered not C,%t co--,nication in connection 2it) co,rt ca%e% b,t general co,n%eling a% 2ellD recogniBing t)at pro$e%%ional advice
2a% re+,ired to avoid litigation a% 2ell a% to engage in litigation. Even t)e identi$ication o$ a client can be privileged i$ it 2o,ld be tanta-o,nt to revealing con$idential in$or-ation abo,t t)at client. T)e privilege i% -,t,al and -ay be clai-ed by t)e client or by t)e attorney on be)al$ o$ t)e clientD b,t it can be 2aived only by t)e client. One -odern co,rt called t)e privilege !t)e -o%t
%acred o$ all legally recogniBed privilege%.! SOCIETAL INTE#EST IN >2ST O2TCO3ES 3ET T-#O2"- ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E /ary C. Daly' La4 Pro e!!or-Ford(a& 2niver!ity' ://G' !E7ec,ting t)e Wrong Per%on' T)e Pro$e%%ional<% Et)ical Dile--a%!D ;1 #oy. #.A.#. (ev. 4&44D p. 4&;4 Con$identiality doe% -ore t)an en)ance t)e individ,al attorney"client relation%)ipD )o2ever. It% proponent% al%o
advance a ,tilitarian C,%ti$ication. 8a%ed on arg,-ent% very %i-ilar to t)o%e di%c,%%ed in t)e preceding paragrap)%D t)ey contend t)at
con$identiality i-prove% t)e +,ality o$ legal advice t)at la2yer% give client%. I-proved legal advice lead% to -ore C,%t verdict% and %ettle-ent% and to -ore $air tran%action%D t),% bene$itting %ociety a% a 2)ole. ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E I3P#O%ES T-E AD3INIST#ATION OF >2STICE =race /. "ie!el' La4 Pro e!!or-)randei! Sc(ool o La4' *+:+' !@pCo)n Warning%D t)e Attorney"Client PrivilegeD and t)e Principle% o$ #a2yer Et)ic%""Ac)ieving :ar-onyD & @. /ia-i #. (ev. 451D p. 4; "& T)e pri-ary rationale $or t)e privilege i% ,tilitarian. 8y protecting co--,nication% bet2een attorney% and client%D t)e privilege enco,rage% client% to $,lly and co-pletely di%clo%e in$or-ation. Only 2it) t)i% co-plete in$or-ation can attorney% render co-petent and proper legal a%%i%tance and advice. T)e a%%,-ption i% t)at client% 2ill not be %o open and di%clo%e %o -,c) and t),% cannot obtain %,c) a%%i%tance and advice ,nle%%

t)o%e client% are con$ident t)at t)e co--,nication% 2it) attorney% 2ill re-ain con$idential . #ong ago in
.*
Anne%ley v. Angle%eaD an Engli%) co,rt %tated' No -an can cond,ct any o$ )i% a$$air% 2)ic) relate to -atter% o$ la2D 2it)o,t e-ploy-ent and con%,lting 2it) an attorneyI even i$ )e i% capable o$ doing it in point o$ %3illD t)e la2 2ill not let )i-I and i$ )e doe% not $,lly and candidly di%clo%e every t)ing t)at i% in )i% -indD 2)ic) )e appre)end% -ay be in t)e lea%t relative to t)e a$$air )e con%,lt% )i% attorney ,ponD it 2ill be i-po%%ible $or t)e attorney properly to %erve )i-. T2o ),ndred and t)irty"eig)t year% laterD t)e @nited State% S,pre-e Co,rt in @pCo)n Co-pany v. @nited State% reiterated t)i% rationale and e7panded ,pon it by noting t)at t)e attorney"client privilege enco,rage% client candorD $,ll
di%clo%,reD and $re+,ent con%,ltation by t)e client 2it) t)e attorney. T)i% co-plete candor and con%,ltation -ean% t)at attorney% can co,n%el client% a% to )o2 to cond,ct t)e-%elve% 2it)in t)e bo,nd% o$ t)e la2. @lti-atelyD t)e ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice i-prove%. P#I%ILE"E IS ESSENTIAL FO# F2LL AND F#AN8 ATTO#NE$-CLIENT CO332NICATION 9,lie Peter% Ba&acona' La4 ST1dent' :///' !Attorney"Client Privilege S,rvive% t)e Deat) o$ t)e Client...! ;4 @. Ar3. #ittle (oc3 #. (ev. ;**D p. ;.&"*
8eyond p)ilo%op)ical t)eorie%D t)ere i% %,rpri%ingly little e-pirical evidence regarding t)e act,alD real"ti-e e$$ect o$ con$identiality on client be)avior. T)e $e2 %t,die% t)at )ave been per$or-ed indicate t)at client% $re+,ently do not ,nder%tand t)e privilegeD b,t t)at -any attorney% and %till $eel t)at a general a2arene%% o$ t)e privilege<% e7i%tence enco,rage% open co--,nication. T)e %t,die% t)at )ave been per$or-ed lead to $e2D i$ anyD $ir- concl,%ion%. According to t2o %t,die%D -any attorney% and client% believe
t)at 2it)o,t t)e con$idential co--,nication% privilegeD attorney"client co--,nication 2o,ld be )a-pered. Anot)er %t,dy %,gge%t% t)at li-ited e7ception% to t)e con$idential co--,nication% privilege -ig)t not c,rtail open co--,nication
..
Attorney-Client Privilege Increa!e! Social Wel are T(ro1g( I&proved #e!pect or t(e La4
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E FACILITATES LAW CO3PLIANCE T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. *4 In additionD greater client candor and co--,nication $acilitate% ongoing co-pliance 2it) t)e la2. #egal r,le% are co-ple7 and $act"%peci$ic in applicationI attorney% are better %it,ated to appreciate t)e -eaning and e$$ect o$ %,c) r,le% and to deter-ine 2)et)er or not action% con$or- to t)e%e r,le%. /oreoverD legal co-pliance en)ance% %ocial 2el$are by $,rt)ering t)e ,nderlying ai-% o$ t)e la2. ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E SE#%ES 32LTIPLE SOCIAL "OODS -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' III. Attorney Client Privilege! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 4 5 "*
A $,ll ,tilitarian conception 2o,ld incorporate t)e val,e t)at non",tilitarian% e7pre%% a% a lay-an<% rig)t to 3no2 t)e la2 and deal 2it) it% co-ple7ity. T)i% rig)t %te-% $ro- a ba%ic principle in)erent in t)e concept o$ t)e r,le o$ la2D t)at !t)e la2 -,%t be capable
o$ being obeyed! and ! o$ g,iding t)e be)avio,r o$ it% %,bCect%.! T)i% rig)t ill,-inate% t2o %et% o$ bene$it% t)at ,tilitarian% traditionally overloo3 2)en con%idering t)e privilege . T)e $ir%t %et o$ additional bene$it% accr,e% 2)en a client )a% an attorney act a% )i% repre%entative in litigation .
People can re%t a%%,red t)at t)ey 2ill not $ace ,nC,%t penaltie% only 2)en t)ey are able to de$end t)e-%elve% $,lly again%t any c)arge% -ay $ace. #itigationD )o2everD pre%ent% an i-po%ing array o$ co-ple7 $or-alitie% and -ode% o$ di%co,r%e. #ay-en cannot be e7pected to navigate t)eir 2ay t)ro,g) t)e%e co-ple7itie% 2it)o,t attorney% . T)e privilege pre%erve% t)e ability o$ lay-en to de$end t)e-%elve% vigoro,%ly and t)ereby a%%,re% t)e- t)at t)e la2 2ill be applied C,%tly. /oreoverD t)e rig)t to be repre%ented by a la2yer i% con%tit,tionally g,aranteed in bot) t)e cri-inal and civil conte7t%. T)e privilege
protect% t)e e$$ective e7erci%e o$ t)i% rig)t by in%,lating t)e attorney"client relation%)ip $ro- %tate intr,%ion. T)e %econd %et o$ additional bene$it% accr,e% 2)en a client con%,lt% an attorney $or advice concerning )i% rig)t% and re%pon%ibilitie% ,nder t)e la2. T)e ideal o$ t)e r,le o$ la2 i% a %ociety in 2)ic) individ,al% are able to con$or- t)eir be)avior to t)e la2. T)e la2 i% %o co-ple7D )o2everD t)at people need t)e a%%i%tance o$ co,n%el to ,nder%tand it% dictate%. A -,r3y ,nder%tanding o$ t)e la2 2ill deny an individ,al t)e repo%e t)at Pro$e%%or 9o%ep) (aB call% !KpLredictability in one<% environ-ent.! #iberty in $actD and not -erely in $or-D re+,ire% t)at an individ,al be %ec,re in t)e e7pectation% e%%ential to -a3ing and carrying o,t li$e<% plan%. I$ an individ,al cannot ,nder%tand t)e r,le% by 2)ic) )e -,%t actD )i% %ec,rity and a,tono-y are co-pro-i%ed. T),%D by protecting a client 2)en )e %ee3% to learn t)e dictate% o$ t)e la2D t)e attorney"client privilege protect% t)e client<% ability to p,r%,e )i% o2n goal% 2it)in t)e con$ine% o$ t)e la2. Con$or-ity to t)e r,le o$ la2 al%o increa%e% t)e la2<% e$$ectivene%% in p,r%,ing 2)atever goal% are a%%igned to it. #ay-en can con$or- only to la2% t)ey ,nder%tand. Wit)o,t t)e aid o$ a la2yer<% adviceD people -ay ,n3no2ingly brea3 la2% t)at t)ey 2o,ld )ave been 2illing to $ollo2. T)ere$oreD t)e attorney"client privilege al%o $,rt)er% %ocial good by pro-oting co-pliance 2it) t)e la2.
.1
Attorney-Client Privilege 8ey to Con!tit1tional D1e Proce!! Protection!

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E I3PO#TANT TO <T- AND GT- A3END3ENT #I"-TS /ic)ael 8. Da!(6ian' La4 St1dent' :/;*' !T)e Attorney"Client Privilege and t)e Cri-inal De$endant<% Con%tit,tional (ig)t%D! Cali$ornia #a2 (evie2D 9,lyD *5 Cali$. #. (ev. 454.D p. 45 5"4 W)ile t)e attorney"client privilege did not originate a% a con%tit,tional doctrineD in cri-inal ca%e% it play% an i-portant role in protecting t)e de$endant<% $i$t) and %i7t) a-end-ent rig)t%. T)i% Part e%tabli%)e% t)at in cri-inal ca%e% t)e attorney"client privilege i% e%%ential to bot) t)e $i$t) a-end-ent privilege again%t %el$"incri-ination and t)e %i7t) a-end-ent rig)t to co,n%el. It $,rt)er %)o2% t)at 2it)o,t o,t t)e attorney"client privilegeD a con%tit,tionally i-per-i%%ible ten%ion i% created bet2een t)o%e rig)t%. FinallyD it %)o2% t)at t)e /eredit) e7ception
to t)e attorney"client privilege i% con%tit,tionally de$ective beca,%e it create% %,c) an i-per-i%%ible ten%ion bet2een a de$endant<% $i$t) and %i7t) a-end-ent rig)t%.
32LTIPLE >2STIFICATIONS FO# ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E P#OTECTIONS T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. &*"1 T)ro,g)o,t t)e attorney"client privilege<% long )i%toryD a n,-ber o$ C,%ti$ication% )ave been o$$ered to %,pport t)e protection it a$$ord%. For e7a-pleD in 4*&.D 8lac3%tone %,gge%ted t)at t)e privilege i% an e7ten%ion o$ t)e rig)t o$ individ,al% to avoid %el$"incri-ination. /odern co--entator% )ave contended t)at t)e privilege i% nece%%ary to pre%erve a cri-inal de$endant<% Fi$t) A-end-ent privilege again%t %el$"incri-ination and Si7t) A-end-ent rig)t to co,n%el. Ot)er% )ave arg,ed t)at t)e privilege i% nece%%ary to ,p)old t)e pro$e%%ional relation%)ip bet2een t)e attorney and client' 2it)o,t itD t)ere co,ld be no con$identiality and corre%ponding tr,%t and loyalty. Si-ilarlyD %o-e co--entator% %,gge%t t)at t)e attorney<% traditional role a% an advocate in o,r adver%arial %y%te- 2o,ld be %erio,%ly ,nder-ined i$ attorney% co,ld be ,tiliBed ro,tinely a% a %o,rce o$ in$or-ation abo,t t)e client. Still ot)er% )ave contended t)at t)e attorney"client privilege i% nece%%ary to protect t)e client<% privacy or dignitary intere%t in preventing inter$erence 2it) t)e client<% relation%)ip 2it) a clo%e advi%or. Eac) o$ t)e%e C,%ti$ication% i% con%i%tent 2it) t)e protection% a$$orded by t)e -odern privilegeD and eac) contin,e% to receive %c)olarly recognition and %,pport. IndeedD eac) C,%ti$ication )ig)lig)t% an i-portant intere%t "
protecting again%t %el$"incri-inationD $acilitating -aintenance o$ t)e tr,%t relation%)ipD g,arding t)e integrity o$ t)e adver%arial %y%te-D and re%pecting legiti-ate e7pectation% o$ privacy and ),-an dignity " t)at t)e privilege o,g)t to contin,e to %erve. T),%D any di%c,%%ion o$ t)e ade+,acy o$ c,rrent privilege doctrine or re$or-% -,%t incl,de con%ideration o$ t)e%e intere%t%. Jet none o$ t)e%e C,%ti$ication% can $,lly e7plain t)e -odern privilegeD 2)ic) applie% in cri-inal and civil conte7t%D protect% attorney"client co--,nication% -ade in and o,t%ide o$ litigationD i% generally ,n+,ali$iedD and a$$ord% protection $or bot) nat,ral and corporate per%on%.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E P#OTECTED )$ <T- AND GT- A3END3ENT 9ocelyn N .Sand! @ (oy Conn' La4 St1dent! :/;A' !Con$identiality and t)e #a2yer<% Con$licting D,tyD! ;* :o2. #.9. 6;1D p. 666"4 T)e attorney"client privilege i% protected by t)e $i$t) and %i7t) a-end-ent% o$ t)e @nited State% Con%tit,tion' t)e
$i$t) a-end-entD a% it relate% to t)e privilege again%t %el$ incri-ination and t)e %i7t) a-end-entD a% it provide% $or e$$ective a%%i%tance o$ co,n%el. In order to paint a co-plete pict,re abo,t t)e -atter abo,t 2)ic) t)e client )a% %o,g)t legal
repre%entationD )e or %)e -ay reveal incri-inating in$or-ation to t)e attorney. In %,c) a %it,ationD t)e $ea%ibility o$ %ee3ing legal repre%entation i% ba%ed on an i-plicit pro-i%e t)at t)e in$or-ation revealed to t)e attorney by t)e client 2ill not be di%clo%ed to a trib,nal. Wit)o,t %,c) a%%,rance% t)e potential client 2o,ld $ind )i-%el$ in a !catc)";;! %it,ation. S)o,ld )e retain a la2yerD )e 2o,ld not get t)e bene$it% o$ repre%entation
2it)o,t ri%3ing incri-ination. A pro %e appearance 2o,ld be at t)e co%t o$ not )aving t)e legal e7perti%e 2)ic) -ay bring )i- a $avorable %ol,tion to )i% proble-.
ATTO#NE$ CLIENT P#I%ILE"E I3PO#TANT TO <T- AND GT- A3END3ENT #I"-TS :arry I. S1.in' La4 Pro e!!or-N$2' :/;<' !T)e #a2yer a% a S,perego' Di%clo%,re o$ Client Con$idence% to Prevent :ar-D! *5 Io2a #. (ev. 4514D p. 446; In %,-D it i% plain t)at t)e attorney"client privilege doe% )ave con%tit,tional i-plication%D relating bot) to %el$" incri-ination and t)e rig)t to co,n%el. W)en a de-and i% -ade o$ an attorney to di%clo%e privileged co--,nication%D t)e de$endant<% $i$t) a-end-ent rig)t% -ay be CeopardiBed. S,c) co--,nication% can con%i%t o$
t)e client<% %tate-ent%D or o$ t)e te%ti-onial a%pect% o$ )i% tran%-i%%ion o$ tangible evidence. In eit)er ca%e a co,rt %)o,ld not per-it

di%clo%,re in t)e ab%ence o$ a con%tit,tionally ade+,ate i--,nity provi%ion. T)e invocation o$ %,c) a provi%ion 2o,ldD )o2everD re%olve t)e %el$"incri-ination proble-.
15
A% to t)e rig)t o$ acce%% to co,n%elD again it i% po%%ible t)at a con%tit,tional i%%,e can be rai%ed by re+,iring t)e attorney to di%clo%e co--,nication%D 2)et)er t)ey are privileged or notD beca,%e %,c) di%clo%,re 2o,ld ,nder-ine t)e attorney"client relation%)ip. I$ t)e attorney i% co-pelled to di%clo%eD )o2everD t)e client<% %i7t) a-end-ent
rig)t% can be protected by providing t)e client 2it) anot)er attorney or an opport,nity to retain one.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E I3PO#TANT TO 3AN$ CONSTIT2TIONAL #I"-TS (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &6 T)e privilege )a% been )onored in S,pre-e Co,rt opinion%D bar r,le%D and %tate %tat,te%. It i% %pelled o,t in t)e A8A<% /odel (,le% o$ Pro$e%%ional Cond,ct a% a !)all-ar3 o$ t)e client"la2yer relation%)ip D! and in t)e Restatement o' the +aw 0overning +aw!ers. It i% even dee-ed by %o-e to be integral to t)e Si7t) A-end-ent<% rig)t to co,n%elD t)e Fi$t) A-end-ent<% protection again%t %el$"incri-inationD and t)e rig)t to privacy. It i% %,bCect to
$e2 e7ception%' to prevent a cri-e or $ra,dD to de$end one%el$D or i$ t)e client agree%.
CONFIDENTIALIT$ "#O2NDED IN CONSTIT2ION (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;64 Con$identiality i% a goalD not an ab%ol,teD and one t)at -,%t be balanced again%t co-peting goal% Wit) root% in everyday e7perience and t)e co--on la2 and e7pre%%ion in -odern %tat,te% and 2idely )eld val,e %y%te-%D con$identiality )a% a )i%toric and precedential clai- to re%pect and protection. Con$identiality al%o )a% derivative con%tit,tional %o,rce%. P#I%ILE"E IS A S2)STANTI%E #I"-T 8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. ;;4 A% 2a% noted in C)apter 4D legal pro$e%%ional privilege i% not %i-ply a r,le o$ evidenceD b,t a %,b%tantive rig)t and !a $,nda-ental condition on 2)ic) t)e ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice a% a 2)ole re%t% .! A% a -atter o$ practiceD
i%%,e% o$ privilege tend to ari%e in a proced,ral conte7tD entitling t)e client Gand )i% la2yer on )i% be)al$H to re$,%e to di%clo%e $or in%pection doc,-ent% or in$or-ation to 2)ic) t)e privilege attac)e%. T)i% 2ill ,%,ally be in t)e conte7t o$ di%clo%,re. In partic,larD t)e rig)t to claiprivilege over a doc,-ent entitle% a party to 2it))old in%pection o$ t)e doc,-ent $ro- )i% opponent ,nder CP( Part 64.
14
Attorney-Client Privilege 8ey to SiCt( A&end&ent Protection!

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E C#ITICAL TO EFFECTI%E #EP#ESENTATION I3PLICATED IN GT- A3END3ENT /ic)ael 8. Da!(6ian' La4 St1dent' :/;*' !T)e Attorney"Client Privilege and t)e Cri-inal De$endant<% Con%tit,tional (ig)t%D! Cali$ornia #a2 (evie2D 9,lyD *5 Cali$. #. (ev. 454.D p. 45 4 T)e Si7t) A-end-ent provide% t)at !KiLn all cri-inal ca%e%D t)e acc,%ed %)all enCoy t)e rig)t . . . to )ave t)e A%%i%tance o$ Co,n%el $or )i% de$en%e.! T)i% con%tit,tional rig)t i% only $,l$illed i$ an attorney provide% )i% client 2it) rea%onably e$$ective legal a%%i%tance. Alt)o,g) %o-e co,rt% and co--entator% )ave %tated t)at e$$ective a%%i%tance re+,ire% a privilege $or attorney"client co--,nication%D -o%t o$ t)e- )ave not %et $ort) t)eir rea%oning in detail. An e7a-ination o$ ca%e la2D )o2everD %)o2% %trong a,t)ority $or t)e propo%ition t)at a li-itation on attorney"client con$identiality re%,lt% in a denial o$ e$$ective a%%i%tance o$ co,n%el beca,%e it deprive% a de$endant o$ a parti%an advocate and re%trict% attorney"client co--,nication%. P#I%ILE"E C#ITICAL TO PA#TISAN AD%OCAC$ @ IN%ESTI"ATION A)ILIT$ W-ICGT- A3END3ENT #ELIES ON /ic)ael 8. Da!(6ian' La4 St1dent' :/;*' !T)e Attorney"Client Privilege and t)e Cri-inal De$endant<% Con%tit,tional (ig)t%D! Cali$ornia #a2 (evie2D 9,lyD *5 Cali$. #. (ev. 454.D p. 45 ;"4 I$ a %tate denied a cri-inal de$endant t)e attorney"client privilegeD t)e client<% %i7t) a-end-ent rig)t% 2o,ld be violated beca,%e )e 2o,ld be deprived o$ an activeD parti%an advocate. A $,nda-ental pre-i%e o$ A-erican la2 i% t)at C,%tice i% ac)ieved t)ro,g) t)e adver%arial %y%te- . Eac) %ide pre%ent% it% ca%e and c)allenge%
t)e ot)er<% arg,-ent%. T)i% i% acco-pli%)ed -ainly t)ro,g) t)e ,%e o$ attorney% 2)o are advocate% $or t)e partie% t)ey repre%ent. ActiveD parti%an advocacyD )o2everD i% i-po%%ible 2)en a de$en%e attorney i% e7pected to give evidence to
t)e pro%ec,tion 2)ile )e i% %,ppo%ed to de$end )i% client. Wit)o,t t)e attorney"client privilegeD de$en%e attorney% co,ld ro,tinely be %,bpoenaed to give evidence again%t t)eir client%. Far $ro- being parti%an advocate%D t)ey 2o,ld in%tead beco-e !-edi,-K%L o$ con$e%%ion again%t t)eir client%.! T),%D activeD parti%an advocacy can only be ac)ieved i$ t)e attorney cannot be re+,ired to div,lge )i% client<% con$idence% to t)e pro%ec,tion. T)e denial o$ t)e attorney"client privilege 2o,ld al%o violate t)e client<% %i7t) a-end-ent rig)t% beca,%e it 2o,ld da-age t)e attorney<% ability to inve%tigate )i% client<% ca%e. To provide e$$ective legal a%%i%tanceD an attorney -,%t inve%tigate t)e $act% o$ )i% client<% ca%e. A proper inve%tigation can only be -ade i$ an attorney i% able to co--,nicate 2it) )i% client and a%certain t)e client<% ver%ion o$ t)e $act% . 8a%ed on t)o%e co--,nication%D
t)e attorney -ay t)en per$or- ot)er $,nction% re+,ired $or an ade+,ate de$en%eD %,c) a% intervie2ing 2itne%%e% or e7a-ining p)y%ical evidence. Wit)o,t t)e attorney"client privilegeD )o2everD t)e client 2o,ld be rel,ctant to con$ide in )i% attorney. T),%D by $o%tering attorney"client co--,nicationD t)e attorney"client privilege )elp% to en%,re t)at an
attorney )a% 2)atever in$or-ation -ig)t be nece%%ary $or a $,ll inve%tigation. W)en an action o$ t)e %tate prevent% a de$en%e attorney $rodi%c)arging $,nction% vital to e$$ective repre%entation o$ )i% clientD a %i7t) a-end-ent violation 2ill be $o,nd 2it)o,t a need $or %)o2ing preC,dice. T),%D in =eder% v. @nited State%D t)e S,pre-e Co,rt )eld t)at a co,rt order preventing a cri-inal de$endant $roco--,nicating 2it) )i% attorney d,ring an overnig)t rece%% deprived )i- o$ )i% %i7t) a-end-ent rig)t to co,n%el. 8eca,%e %,c) rece%%e% are $re+,ently nece%%ary $or attorney"client co--,nication%D t)e Co,rt rea%onedD barring an attorney $ro- -eeting 2it) )i% client co,ld %ti$le t)e attorney<% ability to cond,ct a proper de$en%e. T)e de$endant 2a% not re+,ired to %)o2 preC,dice to obtain a rever%alI a% anot)er S,pre-e Co,rt ca%e %tatedD %,c) a re+,ire-ent 2o,ld re+,ire !,ng,ided %pec,lation! in ca%e% 2)ere co,n%el i% prevented $ro- carrying o,t )i% nor-al $,nction%. T)e%e principle% de-on%trate t)at a %tate<% abridg-ent o$ t)e
attorney"client privilegeD by li-iting t)e attorney<% ability to co--,nicate 2it) )i% client and to inve%tigate t)e ca%eD 2o,ld deny t)e client e$$ective a%%i%tance o$ co,n%el. ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E "#O2NDED IN GT- A3END3ENT Pa,l C. "iannelli' La4 Pro e!!or-Ca!e We!tern #e!erve' *++/' @nder%tanding EvidenceD p. .* T)e attorney"client privilege i% !t)e olde%t o$ t)e privilege% $or con$idential co--,nication% 3no2n to t)e co--on la2.! A %eparate +,ali$ied privilege $or 2or3 prod,ct )a% al%o been recogniBed. T)e attorney"client privilege i% intended to per-it client% to receive in$or-ed legal advice and e$$ective repre%entationD 2)ic) depend% on !$,ll and $ran3 co--,nication bet2een attorney% and t)eir client%.! T)i% D in t,rnD i% t)o,g)t to !pro-ote broader p,blic intere%t% in t)e ob%ervance o$ la2 and ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice. T)e privilege recogniBe% t)at %o,nd legal advice or advocacy %erve% p,blic end% and t)at %,c) advice or advocacy depend% ,pon t)e la2yer<% being $,lly in$or-ed by t)e client.! In cri-inal ca%e%D t)e Si7t) A-end-ent rig)t to t)e e$$ective a%%i%tance o$ co,n%el al%o %,pport% t)e privilege.
1;
P#I%ILE"E C#ITICAL TO T-E #I"-T TO EFFECTI%E CO2NSEL (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. 1 Franci% 8aconD O' #ounsel T)e greate%t tr,%t bet2een -en...i% t)e tr,%t o$ giving co,n%el . For in ot)er con$idence% -en co--it t)e part% o$ li$eI
t)eir land%D t)eir goodD t)eir c)ildrenD t)eir credit. So-e partic,lar a$$airI b,t to %,c) a% t)ey -a3e t)eir co,n%elor% t)ey co--it t)e 2)oleD by )o2 -,c) t)e -ore t)ey are obliged to all $ait) and integrity. T)e la2yer -,%t )ave t)e whole o$ )i% client<%
ca%e...to give any ,%e$,l advice...T)at t)e 2)ole 2ill not be told to co,n%el ,nle%% t)e privilege i% con$identialD i% per$ectly clear. LE"AL #EP#ESENTATION )ETTE# W-EN ATTO#NE$ 8NOWS ALL T-E FACTS Step)en Ell&ann' La4 Pro e!!or' N$2' *+++' !Sy-po%i,- Ca%e St,die% in #egal Et)ic%' Tr,t) and Con%e+,ence%D! &1 Ford)a- #. (ev. .1 D p. 154 OrdinarilyD it i% in t)e client<% intere%t $or )i% la2yer to 3no2 t)e tr,t). A la2yer repre%ent% )er client be%t 2)en %)e 3no2% all o$ t)e relevant circ,-%tance%. Only 2it) t)i% co-plete 3no2ledge can a la2yer pre%ent t)e client<% ca%e or po%ition in t)e -o%t $avorable lig)tD avoid di%a%tro,% %,rpri%e%D devi%e %trategie% to )andle 2)atever 2ea3 point% e7i%t a% 2ell a% t)ey can be )andledD and en%,re t)at t)e event,al o,tco-e o$ t)e ca%e $it% t)e client<% act,al 2i%)e% and intere%t% a% acc,rately a% po%%ible . For prag-atic and pro$e%%ional
rea%on%D t)ere$oreD %ee3ing t)e tr,t) -a3e% %en%e.
16
Attorney-Client Privilege 8ey to Fi t( A&end&ent Protection!

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E C#ITICAL TO <T- A3END3ENT P#OTECTION A"AINST INC#I3INATION /ic)ael 8. Da!(6ian' La4 St1dent' :/;*' !T)e Attorney"Client Privilege and t)e Cri-inal De$endant<% Con%tit,tional (ig)t%D! Cali$ornia #a2 (evie2D 9,lyD *5 Cali$. #. (ev. 454.D p. 45 4 T)e $i$t) a-end-ent provide% t)at !KnLo per%on . . . %)all be co-pelled in any cri-inal ca%e to be a 2itne%% again%t )i-%el$.! T)e a-end-ent pro)ibit% co-pelled te%ti-onial di%clo%,re% 2)ic) -ig)t %erve a% a !lin3 in a c)ain! o$ evidence leading to a cri-inal conviction. T)e privilege again%t %el$"incri-inationD li3e t)e rig)t to co,n%elD )a% $re+,ently been lin3ed to t)e attorney"client privilege.
So-e co,rt% )ave %tated in dict,- t)at t)e attorney"client privilege i% e%%ential in cri-inal ca%e% i$ t)e client i% to -aintain )i% $i$t) a-end-ent protection again%t %el$"incri-ination. In People v. 8elgeD a Ne2 Jor3 co,rt %aid' !KTL)e cri-inal de$endant<%
%el$"incri-ination rig)t% beco-e co-pletely n,gatory i$ co-p,l%ory di%clo%,re can be e7acted t)ro,g) )i% attorney.! Si-ilarlyD in State v. Aociole3D t)e Ne2 9er%ey S,pre-e Co,rt %tated t)at t)e !attorney"client privilege in t)i% co,ntry . . . KiL% indi%pen%able to t)e $,l$ill-ent o$ t)e con%tit,tional %ec,rity again%t %el$" incri-ination. . . . ! P#I%ILE"E NECESSA#$ TO %IOLATE <T- A3END3ENT P#OTECTION %IA CO3P2LSION /ic)ael 8. Da!(6ian' La4 St1dent' :/;*' !T)e Attorney"Client Privilege and t)e Cri-inal De$endant<% Con%tit,tional (ig)t%D! Cali$ornia #a2 (evie2D 9,lyD *5 Cali$. #. (ev. 454.D p. 45 Co-p,l%ion o$ an acc,%ed i% $o,nd 2)enever t)e acc,%ed -,%t %,$$er a penalty $or invo3ing )i% $i$t) a-end-ent rig)t to re-ain %ilent. For e7a-pleD in =arrity v. Ne2 9er%eyD t)e S,pre-e Co,rt )eld t)at %tate-ent% obtained
,nder t)reat o$ re-oval $ro- p,blic o$$ice co,ld not be ,%ed in %,b%e+,ent cri-inal proceeding%. T)e de$endant%< c)oice eit)er to $or$eit t)eir Cob% or to incri-inate t)e-%elve% ca,%ed t)e %tate-ent% to be !in$ected by coercion.! It 2a% con%idered irrelevant t)at t)e de$endant% in =arrity act,ally c)o%e to -a3e t)e incri-inating %tate-ent%D a% t)e %tat,tory %c)e-e 2)ic) penaliBed a de$endant $or invo3ing )i% rig)t to re-ain %ilent 2a% it%el$ %,$$icient coercion to violate t)e $i$t) a-end-ent.
Denial o$ t)e attorney"client privilege i% co-p,l%ion beca,%e it penaliBe% t)e client<% rig)t o$ e$$ective co,n%el i$ )e 2i%)e% to avoid %el$"incri-ination. Wit)o,t t)e attorney"client privilegeD an attorney co,ld ro,tinely be %,bpoenaed to prod,ce )i% co--,nication% 2it) )i% client. T)e only 2ay t)e client co,ld prevent %el$"incri-inating %tate-ent% $ro- reac)ing t)e pro%ec,tion 2o,ld be $or )i- to li-it )i% co--,nication% 2it) )i% attorney. I$ t)i% occ,r%D t)e attorney -ay not receive all t)e $act% nece%%ary $or an ade+,ate de$en%e. A% %)o2n earlierD %,c) li-itation% on co--,nication bet2een attorney and client con%tit,te a,to-atic violation% o$ t)e %i7t) a-end-ent g,arantee o$ e$$ective co,n%el. T),%D 2it)o,t t)e attorney"client privilegeD t)e client lo%e% )i% con%tit,tional rig)t to co,n%el in order to avoid %el$"incri-ination. T)i% i% co-p,l%ion violating t)e $i$t) a-end-ent. O#I"INAL >2STIFICATION FO# ATTO#NE$ CLIENT P#I%ILE"E "#O2NDED IN P#OTECTION A"AINST SELF INC#I3INATION -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' III. Attorney Client Privilege! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 4 5; :i%torian% do not agree on 2)y co,rt% originally granted a privilege $or attorney"client co--,nication%. T)ey do agreeD )o2everD t)at t)e original C,%ti$ication $or t)e privilege 2a% non",tilitarian . T)e privilege -ay )ave $ir%t ari%en a% a C,dicial e7ten%ion o$ t)e rig)t o$ individ,al% to avoid %el$"incri-ination. A% 8lac3%tone %tated in 4*&.' no -an i% to be e7a-ined to prove )i% o2n in$a-y. And no co,n%elD attorneyD or ot)er per%onD intr,%ted 2it) t)e %ecret% o$ t)e ca,%e by t)e party )i-%el$D %)all be co-pelledD or per)ap% allo2edD to give evidence o$ %,c) conver%ation or -atter% o$ privacyD a% ca-e to )i% 3no2ledge by virt,e o$ %,c) tr,%t and con$idence .
14
Attorney-Client Privilege Central Feat1re o >1!tice Sy!te&

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E -AS LON" )EEN A CENT#AL PA#T OF AN"LOA3E#ICAN >2STICE S$STE3S T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. & "* T)e attorney"client privilege i% t)e olde%t o$ t)e evidentiary privilege%D predating t)e Con%tit,tion . T)e Anglo" A-erican privilege developed conte-poraneo,%ly 2it) t)e rig)t o$ co-p,l%ory proce%%D and t)e availability o$ t)e doctrine i% ,n+,e%tioned in every C,ri%diction in t)i% co,ntry. IndeedD %o-e $or- o$ t)e privilege i% probably g,aranteed in t)e cri-inal conte7t by t)e Si7t) A-end-ent to t)e Con%tit,tion and parallel %tate con%tit,tional provi%ion%. In t)e civil
conte7tD t)e protection% t)at t)e privilege provide% do not ri%e to t)e con%tit,tional levelD b,t %,c) protection% are recogniBed by t)e $ederal co,rt% and all $i$ty %tate%. De%pite t)e privilege<% long )i%tory and t)e enor-o,% a-o,nt o$ litigation it )a% %pa2nedD t)e ba%ic ele-ent% o$ t)e privilege
)ave re-ained largely t)e %a-e $or over a cent,ry. @nle%% it i% 2aivedD t)e attorney"client privilege protect% con$idential co--,nication% bet2een t)e client and attorney -ade $or t)e p,rpo%e o$ obtaining or providing legal advice. O$ co,r%eD +,e%tion% regarding eac) o$ t)e%e ele-ent% generate controver%y " i.e.D 2)o i% t)e clientD 2)en
i% a co--,nication -ade in con$idenceD 2)en are attorney co--,nication% to t)e client privilegedD and 2)en i% con$identiality 2aived.
LON" T#ADITION OF S2PPO#T FO# ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E 9e$$rey (. )a5er' La4 Pro e!!or - Fa1l5ner 2niver!ity Sc(ool o La4' *+::' !Nece%%ary T)ird Partie%' /,ltidi%ciplinary Collaboration and Inade+,ate Pro$e%%ional Privilege% in Do-e%tic 0iolence PracticeD! ;4 Col,-. 9. =ender M #. ;.6D p. 6; "* T)e attorney"client privilege i% t)e olde%tD longe%t recogniBed te%ta-entary privilege in legal )i%tory . Trac3ing Wig-ore<% a,t)oritative narrativeD t)e privilege appear% in -any )i%toric and -ode- treati%e%. T)e privilege even e7i%ted in pri-itive $or- a-ong t)e advocate% o$ (o-e. In early Engli%) la2D t)e privilege 2a% pre-i%ed ,pon a la2yer<% o2n t)eory o$ oat) and )onor. 8y t)e late 4*55%D t)e doctrine %)i$ted to t)e client and t)e client<% $ear o$ di%clo%,reD loo3ing to !t)e nece%%ity o$ providing %,bCectively $or t)e client<% $reedo- o$ appre)en%ion in con%,lting )i% legal advi%or.! T)i% t)eory i% t)e root o$ t)e privilege in A-erica""recogniBing a co%t to tr,t)"%ee3ingD b,t balancing it again%t t)e nece%%ity o$ $reeD ,ng,arded co--,nication bet2een client and attorney. T)e t)eory a%%,-e% privilege i-po%e% no real co%t on tr,t) %ee3ing beca,%eD
2it)o,t a pro-i%e o$ con$identiality ve%ted in t)e la2yerD t)e client 2o,ld not -a3e t)e %tate-ent% or ad-i%%ion% at all.
Attorney-Client Privilege Central Feat1re o t(e Adver!arial >1!tice Sy!te&

P#I%ILE"E FACILITATES EFFECTI%E F2NCITONIN" OF AD%E#SA#IAL S$STE3 Nancy 9. 3oore' La4 Pro e!!or-#1tger!' :/;<F:/;GD !#i-it% to Attorney"Client Con$identiality' A <P)ilo%op)ically In$or-ed< And Co-parative Approac) to #egal and /edical Et)ic%D! 6& Ca%e. W. (e%. 4**D p. ;54" T)e Advocate in t)e Adver%ary Sy%te-. T)e adver%ary %y%te- o$ litigation i% c)aracteriBed by t)ree e%%ential ele-ent%' an i-partial trib,nalD $or-al r,le% o$ proced,reD and partie% 2)o are a%%igned t)e re%pon%ibility $or pre%enting t)eir o2n be%t ca%e% and c)allenging t)e pre%entation o$ t)eir opponent%. T)e pri-ary d,ty o$ t)e advocate in t)e adver%ary %y%te- i% !one"%ided parti%an BealD! 2)ic) i% e7pected to prod,ceD at lea%t in t)e long r,nD eit)er protection o$ t)e individ,al again%t t)e po2er o$ t)e %tate Gin t)e ca%e o$ cri-inal de$endant%H or $act,ally and legally acc,rate verdict% Gin t)e ca%e o$ civil plainti$$% and de$endant%H. In t)i% %c)e-eD t)e d,ty o$ con$identiality i% b,t a !collateral d,ty! de%igned to en)ance t)e +,ality o$ parti%an advocacyD ,nder t)e ,tilitarian a%%,-ption Gborro2ed $ro- t)e la2 o$ evidenceH t)at con$identiality enco,rage% client% to give la2yer% t)e in$or-ation nece%%ary $or e$$ective advocacy. Aeeping in -ind t)e %,bordinate po%ition o$ t)e d,ty o$ con$identialityD it %)o,ld be obvio,% t)at t)e critical +,e%tion% ,nder t)e adver%ary %y%te- are not 2)at li-it% %)o,ld be placed on con$identialityD b,t rat)er 2)at li-it% %)o,ld be placed on parti%an Beal in order t)at t)e vario,% goal% o$ t)e adver%ary %y%te- -ay be be%t ac)ieved. T)ere are already a n,-ber o$ 2ell"accepted li-itation% on advocacy "" $or e7a-pleD r,le% 2)ic) pro)ibit a la2yer $rolyingD $roco,n%eling or a%%i%ting client% in cri-e% and $ra,d%D andD in civil ca%e%D $ro- violating r,le% re+,iring tr,t)$,l pleading and co-pliance 2it) e7ten%ive di%covery re+,e%t% . T)e%e li-itation% -ay 2ell )ave t)e e$$ect o$
deterring client%D even !innocent! client%D $ro- $,ll di%clo%,reD b,t t)ey )ave been deter-ined to be C,%ti$iable nonet)ele%%.
P#I%ILE"E NECESSA#$ FO# EFFECTI%E AD%E#SA#IAL S$STE3 A,b,rn A. Daily @ S. 8ritta T(orn01i!t' La4 St1dent!-"eorgeto4n 2niver!ity' *++ED !:a% t)e E7ception O,tgro2n t)e PrivilegeF!D 4& =eo. 9. #egal Et)ic% .6D p. .6 Co-petent legal advice re+,ire% a co-plete ,nder%tanding o$ t)e circ,-%tance% %,rro,nding a client<% need% and %,c) an ,nder%tanding -ay only be gained by enco,raging co-plete di%clo%,re 2it)in t)e attorney" client relation%)ipI i$ a client $ear% %,b%e+,ent di%clo%,re o$ co--,nicated in$or-ation in a co,rt o$ la2D t)en $,ll di%clo%,re i% ,nli3elyI andD $,lly in$or-ed adviceD or advocacy in o,r adver%arial %y%te-D pro-ote% t)e ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice. EFFECTI%E #EP#ESENTATION )$ CO2NSEL C#ITICAL TO T-E AD%E#SA#$ S$STE3 /artin (. "ardner' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity o Ne.ra!5a' *+++' !T)e Si7t) A-end-ent (ig)t to Co,n%el and it% @nderlying 0al,e%' De$ining t)e Scope o$ Privacy ProtectionD! 15 9 Cri-. #. M Cri-inology 61*D p. 61*". T)e Si7t) A-end-ent )a% been de%cribed by leading co--entator% a% t)e central $eat,re o$ o,r adver%arial %y%te-D nevert)ele%% !%c)olar%D la2yer%D and C,dge% )ave o$ten lo%t t)eir 2ay! in t)eir atte-pt% to ,nder%tand t)e A-end-ent<% %cope and ,nderlying val,e%. S,c) ob%ervation% are partic,larly $itting in t)e conte7t o$ t)e rig)t to co,n%el provi%ion. A %earc) o$ t)e %c)olarly literat,re reveal% a variety o$ vie2point% regarding t)e intere%t% e-braced by t)e Si7t) A-end-ent<% pro-i%e t)at !in all cri-inal pro%ec,tion%D t)e acc,%ed %)all ... )ave t)e A%%i%tance o$ Co,n%el $or )i% de$en%e.! /oreoverD t)e reported ca%e% be%pea3 a body o$ la2 lac3ing t)eoretical co)e%ion. EFFECTI%E #EP#ESENTATION )$ CO2NSEL C#ITICAL TO A FAI# T#IAL /artin (. "ardner' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity o Ne.ra!5a' *+++' !T)e Si7t) A-end-ent (ig)t to Co,n%el and it% @nderlying 0al,e%' De$ining t)e Scope o$ Privacy ProtectionD! 15 9 Cri-. #. M Cri-inology 61*D p. 611"455 T)e -o%t pro-inent val,e botto-ing t)e Si7t) A-end-ent rig)t to co,n%el provi%ion i% t)e concern $or providing $air trial% $or cri-inal de$endant%. T)e ca%e% %ee3 to protect t)e $airne%% val,e not only d,ring t)e act,al trial b,t
al%o ,nder certain circ,-%tance% d,ring t)e pretrial p)a%e.
In =ideon v. Wain2rig)tD t)e Co,rt addre%%ed t)e ,n$airne%% in)erent 2)en de$endant% are $inancially ,nable to obtain co,n%el d,ring trial. In =ideonD t)e Co,rt recogniBed t)e applicability o$ t)e Si7t) A-end-ent co,n%el rig)t to t)e State% and )eld t)at indigent de$endant% 2ere entitled to co,n%el at %tate e7pen%e. T)e co,rt noted'
1&
(ea%on and re$lection re+,ire ,% to recogniBe t)at in o,r adver%ary %y%te- o$ cri-inal C,%ticeD any per%on )aled into co,rtD 2)o i% too poor to )ire a la2yerD cannot be a%%,red a $air trial ,nle%% co,n%el i% provided $or )i-.
T)i% %ee-% to ,% to be an obvio,% tr,t). =overn-ent%D bot) %tate and $ederalD +,ite properly %pend va%t %,-% o$ -oney to e%tabli%) -ac)inery to try de$endant% acc,%ed o$ cri-e. #a2yer% to pro%ec,te are every2)ere dee-ed e%%ential to protect t)e p,blic<% intere%t in an orderly %ociety. Si-ilarlyD t)ere are $e2 de$endant% c)arged 2it) cri-eD $e2 indeedD 2)o $ail to )ire t)e be%t la2yer% t)ey can get to prepare and pre%ent t)eir de$en%e%. T)at govern-ent )ire% la2yer% to pro%ec,te and de$endant% 2)o )ave t)e
-oney )ire la2yer% to de$end are t)e %tronge%t indication% o$ t)e 2ide%pread belie$ t)at la2yer% in cri-inal co,rt% are nece%%itie%D not l,7,rie% ... Fro- t)e very beginningD o,r %tate and national con%tit,tion% and la2% )ave laid great
e-p)a%i% on proced,ral and %,b%tantive %a$eg,ard% de%igned to a%%,re $air trial% be$ore i-partial trib,nal% in 2)ic) every de$endant %tand% e+,al be$ore t)e la2. T)i% noble ideal cannot be realiBed i$ t)e poor -an c)arged 2it) cri-e )a% to $ace )i% acc,%er% 2it)o,t a la2yer to a%%i%t )i-. T)e =ideon Co,rt recogniBed t)e ,n$airne%% o$ $orcing a de$endant ,ntrained in t)e la2 to de$end )i-%el$ again%t t)e po2er and legal ac,-en o$ t)e State. Fairne%% re+,ire% ro,g) e+,ality bet2een adver%arial opponent%.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT CONFIDENTIALIT$ FO2NDATION OF EFFECTI%E AD%E#SA#IAL S$STE3 Fred C. Bac(aria!' La4 Pro e!!or Cornell La4 Sc(ool' :/;/ !(et)in3ing Con$identialityD! *4 Io2a #. (ev. 6 4D p. 6 . T)e pri-ary arg,-ent in $avor o$ attorney"client con$identiality in civil ca%e% re%t% on a t)ree"%tep %yllogi%-. Fir%tD $or t)e adver%ary %y%te- to operateD citiBen% -,%t ,%e la2yer% to re%olve di%p,te% and t)e la2yer% -,%t be able to repre%ent client% e$$ectively. SecondD attorney% can be e$$ective only i$ t)ey )ave all t)e relevant $act% at t)eir di%po%al. T)irdD client% 2ill not e-ploy la2yer%D or at lea%t 2ill not provide t)e- 2it) ade+,ate in$or-ationD ,nle%% all a%pect% o$ t)e attorney"client relation%)ip re-ain %ecret . T),%D t)e %y%te-ic arg,-ent goe%D attorney"client con$identiality i% t)e $o,ndation o$ orderly and e$$ective adver%arial C,%tice.
1*
Attorney-Client Privilege "ro1nded in %ario1! 3oral T(eorie!

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E "#O2NDED IN DEONTOLO"ICAL AND 2TILITA#IAN T-EO#$ Nancy 9. 3oore' La4 Pro e!!or-#1tger!' :/;<F:/;GD !#i-it% to Attorney"Client Con$identiality' A <P)ilo%op)ically In$or-ed< And Co-parative Approac) to #egal and /edical Et)ic%D! 6& Ca%e. W. (e%. 4**D p. ;4& A% in t)e p)y%ician"patient relation%)ipD t)e principle o$ con$identiality in t)e attorney"client relation%)ip i% 2ell" gro,nded in bot) ,tilitarian and deontological -oral t)eory. At lea%t 2it) re%pect to individ,al client%D t)e attorney i% clearly ,nder a pri-a $acie d,ty not to di%clo%e in$or-ation relating to t)e %,bCect o$ t)e repre%entation 2it)o,t t)e client<% con%ent. 9,%t a% in -edical et)ic%D )o2everD di$$ic,lt +,e%tion% do ari%e in deter-ining 2)en t)i% pri-a $acie d,ty o,g)t to be overridden by ot)erD -ore 2eig)ty con%ideration% . @nder ,tilitarian t)eoryD t)e
an%2er lie% in atte-pt% to -a3e reali%tic a%%,-ption% regardingD $ir%tD t)e e7tent to 2)ic) client% 2o,ld act,ally be deterred $rocon$iding in t)eir attorney% andD %econdD t)e net balance o$ bene$it over )ar-D bot) to pre%ent and potential victi-%. @nder
deonotological t)eoryD t)e an%2er lie% in deter-ining 2)et)er t)e client<% rig)t to privacy i% $or$eited entirely by an act o$ ,nC,%t aggre%%ion or %i-ply overridden by ot)erD -ore i-portant rig)t% and d,tie% .
W)ile neit)er approac) re%,lt% in ea%y %ol,tion% to all o$ t)e perennial proble-% o$ con$identialty and di%clo%,reD t)e !p)ilo%op)ically in$or-ed! approac) can be ,%e$,lD bot) in eval,ating vario,% provi%ion% o$ c,rrent and propo%ed et)ic% code% $or la2yer% and in %,gge%ting area% $or $,t,re e7ploration by la2yer% and p)ilo%op)er% ali3e.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E "#O2NDED IN DEONTOLO"ICAL AND 2TILITA#IAN T-EO#$ Nancy 9. 3oore' La4 Pro e!!or-#1tger!' :/;<F:/;GD !#i-it% to Attorney"Client Con$identiality' A <P)ilo%op)ically In$or-ed< And Co-parative Approac) to #egal and /edical Et)ic%D! 6& Ca%e. W. (e%. 4**D p. ;4& A% in t)e p)y%ician"patient relation%)ipD t)e principle o$ con$identiality in t)e attorney"client relation%)ip i% 2ell" gro,nded in bot) ,tilitarian and deontological -oral t)eory. At lea%t 2it) re%pect to individ,al client%D t)e attorney i% clearly ,nder a pri-a $acie d,ty not to di%clo%e in$or-ation relating to t)e %,bCect o$ t)e repre%entation 2it)o,t t)e client<% con%ent. 9,%t a% in -edical et)ic%D )o2everD di$$ic,lt +,e%tion% do ari%e in deter-ining 2)en t)i% pri-a $acie d,ty o,g)t to be overridden by ot)erD -ore 2eig)ty con%ideration% . @nder ,tilitarian t)eoryD t)e
an%2er lie% in atte-pt% to -a3e reali%tic a%%,-ption% regardingD $ir%tD t)e e7tent to 2)ic) client% 2o,ld act,ally be deterred $rocon$iding in t)eir attorney% andD %econdD t)e net balance o$ bene$it over )ar-D bot) to pre%ent and potential victi-%. @nder
deonotological t)eoryD t)e an%2er lie% in deter-ining 2)et)er t)e client<% rig)t to privacy i% $or$eited entirely by an act o$ ,nC,%t aggre%%ion or %i-ply overridden by ot)erD -ore i-portant rig)t% and d,tie% .
W)ile neit)er approac) re%,lt% in ea%y %ol,tion% to all o$ t)e perennial proble-% o$ con$identialty and di%clo%,reD t)e !p)ilo%op)ically in$or-ed! approac) can be ,%e$,lD bot) in eval,ating vario,% provi%ion% o$ c,rrent and propo%ed et)ic% code% $or la2yer% and in %,gge%ting area% $or $,t,re e7ploration by la2yer% and p)ilo%op)er% ali3e.
1.
Attorney-Client Privilege Pro&ote! #e!pect or Individ1al A1tono&y

P#I%ILE"E I3PO#TANT P#OTECTION FO# INDI%ID2AL A2TONO3$ Ed2ard 9. I&4in5elried' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity College D1.lin' *++E' !An E%%ay on (et)in3ing t)e Fo,ndation% o$ Evidentiary Privilege%D! .6 8.@.#. (ev. 64 D p. 6;."65 A% t)e la%t %entence %,gge%t%D liberal de-ocratic t)eory repeatedly re$er% to t)e pre$erence% and rig)t% o$ !per%on%D! and t)e t)eory ,lti-ately re%t% on a concept o$ per%on)ood. T)e t)eory -a3e% an ontological a%%,-ption
abo,t t)e nat,re o$ t)e being% 2)o pop,late liberal de-ocracie%D beca,%e only certain type% o$ being% are capable o$ %el$"governance.
T)e a,tono-o,% per%on i% a %ocial being 2it) cognitive and volitional capacity. In -a3ing )i% or )er li$e pre$erence c)oice%D t)e per%on %)o,ld realiBe t)o%e capacitie% . AgainD a% 8randei% ob%ervedD !t)e $inal end! o$ t)e
liberal de-ocratic %tate i% to enable it% citiBen% to develop t)eir capacitie% and $ac,ltie%.
To realiBe )i% or )er cognitive $ac,ltyD t)e per%on o,g)t to -a3e intelligent li$e pre$erence c)oice%. T)e per%on i% a rational agent. To $,lly act,aliBe )i% or )er capacity a% a rational agentD t)e per%on %)o,ld -a3e in$or-ed c)oice%. So-eti-e%D a% a %ocial beingD t)e per%on need% to con%,lt ot)er -e-ber% o$ %ociety in order to -a3e an in$or-ed c)oice. T)e per%on -ay need to $or- a con%,ltative relation 2it) a t)ird party to ac+,ire e%%ential in$or-ation or advice. 8y entering into t)e relationD t)e per%on can ac)ieve a -ore co-plete ,nder%tanding o$ bot) t)e range o$
c)oice% and t)e ra-i$ication% o$ t)e vario,% c)oice%. In t2o %it,ation%D t)e per%on )a% an ac,te need $or con%,ltation. Fir%tD t)e
per%on -ay )ave to con%,lt a t)ird party 2)en t)e t)ird party po%%e%%e% e7perti%e t)e per%on need% to -a3e an in$or-ed li$e pre$erence c)oice. A certain body o$ 3no2ledgeD trainingD or %3ill i% )elp$,l in -a3ing an intelligent c)oiceD and t)e per%on realiBe% t)at )e or %)e lac3% t)at e7perti%e. :enceD to decide 2)et)er to adopt a partic,lar religio,% pre$erenceD t)e per%on -ay need to
con$er 2it) a 3no2ledgeable repre%entative o$ t)at religion. AlternativelyD to re%olve 2)et)er to -a3e a certain c)oice a% to a conte-plated -edical proced,reD t)e per%on -ig)t )ave to %pea3 2it) a p)y%ician. Or i$ t)e per%on<% li$e plan co-e% into con$lict 2it) t)at o$ anot)er citiBenD t)e per%on -ay need to con%,lt an attorney. A% t)e S,pre-e Co,rt )a% recogniBedD t)e per%on -ay !re+,ireKL t)e g,iding )and o$ co,n%el.! In all t)e%e ca%e%D con%,lting an e7pert
increa%e% t)e intelligence and gen,ine a,tono-y o$ t)e per%on<% c)oice.

T)e %econd %it,ation i% a ca%e in 2)ic) t)e per%on need% to con%,lt ot)er $a-ily -e-ber%. Per%on% are capable o$ %el$"%acri$ice and c)oo%ing altr,i%tic pre$erence%. E%pecially in t)e $a-ily conte7tD t)e per%on -ay c)oo%e t)e good o$ anot)er $a-ily -e-ber a% )i% or )er o2n pre$erence. Fello2 $a-ily -e-ber% are nat,ral obCect% o$ t)e per%on<% love. Even 2)en t)e per%on<% relation%)ip 2it) )i% or )er $a-ily i% a clo%e oneD )o2everD it can be di$$ic,lt $or t)e per%on to di%cern t)e ot)er $a-ily -e-ber<% de%ire%. Anot)er $a-ily -e-ber<% pre$erence% can be opa+,e to t)e per%on. To learn t)o%e pre$erence%D t)e per%on -ay need to engage in inti-ate conver%ation 2it) t)e $ello2 $a-ily -e-berD C,%t a% t)e per%on 2o,ld 2it) an e7pert.
P#I%ILE"E "#O2NDED IN PE#SONAL A2TONO3$ Ed2ard 9. I&4in5elried' La4 Pro e!!or-2D Cal Davi!' *++*' !T)e :i%torical Cycle in t)e #a2 o$ Evidentiary Privilege%D! Ar3. #. (ev. ;44D p. ; 1"&5 An alternativeD per)ap% -ore pro-i%ing t)eory i% t)at privilege doctrine can be gro,nded in t)e rig)t to per%onal a,tono-y. In t)i% conte7tD per%onal a,tono-y -ean% deci%ional privacyD or $reedo- $ro- control Ga% oppo%ed to $reedo- $ro- %cr,tinyH. In a liberal de-ocracyD per%onal a,tono-y i%"or at lea%t approac)e%"t)e %tat,% o$ an ,lti-ate val,e. T)e $ollo2ing i% a po%%ible line o$ arg,-entD lin3ing per%onal a,tono-y to evidentiary privilege%. T)e line o$ arg,-ent begin% 2it) a conception o$ t)e per%on% 2)o pop,late liberal de-ocracie%"per%on% po%%e%%ed o$ bot) cognitive and volitional capacitie%. In a liberal de-ocracyD to an i-portant degree t)e%e per%on% are allo2ed to c)oo%e t)eir o2n li$e pre$erence% . In t)e @nited State%D t)e co,rt% )ave con$erred %pecial con%tit,tional protection on t)e independence o$ li$e pre$erence c)oice% related to %,c) -atter% a% religionD $a-ilyD )ealt)D and la2. To $,lly realiBe t)eir potential a% cognitive being%D per%on% %)o,ld be allo2ed to -a3e intelligent li$e pre$erence c)oice% in t)e%e -atter%. :o2everD in %o-e ca%e% t)e per%on% lac3 t)e in$or-ation or e7perti%e to -a3e %,c) c)oice% . In t)at eventD t)ey -,%t con%,lt eit)er a $ello2 $a-ily -e-ber or an e7pert %,c) a% a -e-ber o$ t)e clergyD a p)y%icianD or an attorney. At t)i% pointD
t)o,g)D a dile--a ari%e%. In t)e proce%% o$ con%,ltationD t)e per%on e7po%e% )i-%el$ or )er%el$ to t)e ri%3 o$ coercion or -anip,lation by t)e ot)er party. T)e per%on need% to con%,lt beca,%e )e or %)e lac3% t)e nece%%ary e7perti%e or t)e re+,i%ite in$or-ation abo,t a $ello2 $a-ily -e-ber<% pre$erence%. #ac3ing t)at e7perti%e or in$or-ationD t)e per%on cannot independently con$ir- t)e t)ird party<% repre%entation% and advice. T)ere i% a ri%3 o$ -anip,lation preci%ely beca,%e t)e per%on -,%t -a3e an act o$ $ait) in t)e t)ird party con%,ltant. T)i% ri%3 co,ld i-peril t)e independence o$ t)e per%on<% li$e pre$erence c)oice and t)ereby $r,%trate )i% or )er %el$"$,l$ill-ent a% a per%on 2it) volitional capacity.
11
STATE -AS D2T$ TO FOSTE# CONDITIONS T-AT C#EATE T#2ST IN CONS2LTATI%E #ELATIONS-IPS NECESSA#$ FO# INDI%ID2AL A2TONO3$ Ed2ard 9. I&4in5elried' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity College D1.lin' *++E' !An E%%ay on (et)in3ing t)e Fo,ndation% o$ Evidentiary Privilege%D! .6 8.@.#. (ev. 64 D p. 666"* A liberal de-ocratic %tate %)o,ld a%%,re it% citiBen% t)at t)ey -ay enter into inti-ate con%,ltative relation%)ip% 2it) -ini-al ri%3 t)at t)eir a,tono-y 2ill be violated d,ring t)e con%,ltation . To acco-pli%) t)i%D t)e %tate -,%t create condition% cond,cive o$ tr,%t. !A% a -atter o$ ele-ental decencyD! a de-ocratic %ociety o,g)t to pro-ote condition% allo2ing t)e per%on to tr,%t t)at t)e con%,ltation it%el$ 2ill not co-pro-i%e )i% or )er a,tono-y. InitiallyD t)e per%on -,%t be able to tr,%t t)at )e or %)e -ay di%clo%e to t)e con%,ltant all o$ t)e in$or-ation t)at t)e con%,ltant need% in order to )elp t)e per%on -a3e an intelligent c)oice. I$ t)e per%on cannot give t)e con%,ltant t)e pertinent $act%D t)e con%,ltant<% advice 2ill be !,%ele%%D i$ not -i%leading.! T)e per%on -,%t be able to engage in li-itedD protected co--,nication 2it) t)e con%,ltant. W)en t)e per%on )old% in$or-ation bac3D t)e con%,ltant i% le%%
t)an ideally in$or-edD and t)e per%on 2ill not enCoy t)e $,ll bene$it o$ t)e con%,ltant<% e7perti%e. F,rt)er-oreD t)e per%on o,g)t to be able to tr,%t t)at t)e con%,ltant 2ill not allo2 any ot)er per%on<% intere%t% to in$l,ence t)e tenor o$ t)e advice. I$ t)e per%on i% to )ave eno,g) $ait) in t)e con%,ltant to rely ,pon and act deci%ively on t)e adviceD t)e per%on -,%t )ave tr,%t in t)e con%,ltant<% integrity. T)e per%on )a% to be in a po%ition to believe t)at t)e con%,ltant 2ill not ta3e advantage o$ t)e per%on $or per%onal aggrandiBe-ent. T)e con%,ltant -,%t act a% part o$ t)e per%on<% !e7tended %el$.! /oreoverD i$ t)e con%,ltant i% to %erve $ait)$,lly t)e per%on<% intere%t%D t)e con%,ltant -,%t be 2illing to give t)e per%on advice t)at 2o,ld %tri3e t)ird partie% a% ,nconventional or ,npop,lar.
Society can e-ploy %everal po%%ible %ocial %trategie% $or pro-oting a per%on<% tr,%t in )i% or )er con%,ltant. One i% to i-po%e %,b%tantive la2 $id,ciary d,tie% on t)e con%,ltant%. Anot)er pro-i%ing %trategyD )o2everD i% to e%tabli%) condition% o$ privacy cond,cive to tr,%t. Privacy i% t)e c,rrency or !-oral capital! $or creating inti-acy and tr,%t. A% 9,%tice
Willia- O. Do,gla% once ob%ervedD t)e !bilateral loyalty! e%%ential to inti-acy i% virt,ally inconceivable 2it)o,t a -ea%,re o$ privacy. Privacy i% part o$ t)e !nece%%ary at-o%p)ere! $or tr,%ting inti-acy . T)e bilateral ,nder%tanding incl,de% t)e per%on<% 2illingne%% to %,rrender )i% or )er privacy by %)aring con$idential in$or-ation 2it) t)e con%,ltant. In re%pon%eD t)e con%,ltant e7pre%%ly or i-plicitly pro-i%e% t)at in t)e $,t,reD )e or %)e 2ill re%pect and -aintain t)e con$identiality o$ t)e in$or-ation a% again%t o,t%ider%. In t)i% analy%i%D privacy i% not conceived a% an end in it%el$. For t)at -atterD privacy i% not even con%idered a pri-ary rig)t. In%teadD it i% dee-ed a derivative rig)tD ari%ing $ro- t)e -ore $,nda-ental rig)t to a,tono-y. Privacy i% vie2ed a% a
condition $or pro-oting a,tono-y. Society can and %)o,ld create private enclave% in 2)ic) a per%on and )i% or )er con%,ltant -ay engage in li-itedD protected co--,nication. T)e individ,al% co--,nicating 2it)in t)e%e enclave% -,%t not only )ave negative $reedo- $ro- t)e -ole%tation o$ t)eir relation%)ipD b,t -,%t al%o $eel t)at t)ey )ave an a$$ir-ative $reedo- to engage in t)e inti-ate co--,nication t)at i% nece%%ary to t)e per%on<% -a3ing intelligentD independent li$e pre$erence c)oice%. Wit)in t)e enclaveD t)e per%on %)o,ld )ave a %en%e o$ $reedo- to di%clo%e all t)e in$or-ation nece%%ary $or t)e con%,ltant to advi%e t)e per%on. T)e per%on o,g)t to be at liberty to reveal t)e $act% co-pletely " !2art%"and"all.! To enCoy t)at $reedo-D t)e per%on -,%t )ave con$idence t)at )i% or )er revelation% 2ill generally be %)ielded $ro- t)ird partie% o,t%ide t)e enclave. W)en t)e per%on co-pletely in$or-% t)e con%,ltantD
t)e per%on can ta3e $,ll advantage o$ t)e con%,ltant<% e7perti%eD and t)e end re%,lt %)o,ld be a -ore intelligent li$e pre$erence c)oice. F,rt)erD in t)e enclaveD t)e con%,ltant o,g)t to $eel $ree to advi%e t)e per%on 2it)o,t $ear o$ %ocial %anction. I$ t)e con%,ltant i% to be $ait)$,l to t)e per%onD t)e con%,ltant cannot allo2 t)e advice to be di%torted by concern $or eit)er t)e con%,ltant<% o2n intere%t% or t)o%e o$ t)ird partie% o,t%ide t)e enclave. Con%,ltation abo,t $,nda-ental li$e pre$erence c)oice% re+,ire% !breat)ing %pace.! T)e con%,ltant %)o,ld be at liberty to !t)in3 alo,d! abo,t all t)e po%%ible option% and obCect% o$ pre$erence available to t)e per%on. T)e con%,ltant -,%t be able to broac) controver%ialD divergentD and even di%%ident po%%ibilitie%. W)en a certain option -ig)t $,rt)er t)e per%on<% pre$erence%D t)e con%,ltant %)o,ld be $ree to elaborate on t)at option even 2)en it i% at odd% 2it) prevailing %ocial %enti-ent. I$ t)e con%,ltant 3ne2D )o2everD t)at )i% or )er conver%ation% 2it) a client co,ld be revealed to t)e p,blic
t)at 3no2ledge -ig)tD at lea%t at a %,bcon%cio,% levelD -otivate t)e con%,ltant to c)ange t)e advice and t)ereby -anip,late t)e per%on<% c)oice. In contra%tD 2)en t)e con%,ltant generally can be a%%,red t)at t)e con$idence% and advice 2ill be cloa3edD t)e o,tco-e o$ t)e con%,ltation %)o,ld be a -ore independent li$e pre$erence c)oice. In %)ortD evidentiary privilege% can %erve a% protection o$ private enclave% $or con%,ltative relation%)ip% centered on $,nda-ental li$e pre$erence c)oice%. P#I%ILE"E P#OTECTS A2TONO3$ (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;*". /odern %c)olar%""Pro$e%%or I-2in3elried $or one"")ave %,gge%ted t)at t)i% i% an ,nreali%tic pre-i%e. A patient 2)o i% in %evere pain 2ill co--,nicate 2it) t)e doctorD )o2ever rel,ctantlyD 2it)o,t regard to t)e +,e%tion o$ con$identiality. I$

a%3edD no
455
do,bt t)e patient 2o,ld pre$er a co--it-ent to con$identialityI b,t ,nder e7tre-e circ,-%tance%D con$identiality 2o,ld not re-ain a condition precedent to a patient<% %ee3ing )elp . A pre$erable rationaleD in Pro$e%%or I-2in3elried<% and ot)er e7pert%< vie2%D i% one ba%ed on per%onal a,tono-y and deci%ional privacy. For citiBen% to -a3e intelligentD critical c)oice%D t)ey need e7pert advice $ro- doctor%D la2yer%D clergyD and ot)er%. To en%,re t)at t)ey get %,c) e7pert adviceD t)e arg,-ent goe%D govern-ent% Gco,rt%D legi%lat,re%H %)o,ld !pro-ote a,tono-y in t)e %en%e o$ deci%ional privacy! byD in Pro$e%%or I-2in3elried<% 2ord%D !creating enclave% $or inti-ate co--,nication.! PE#SONAL A2TONO3$ >2STIFICATION FO# P#I%ILE"E CO3)INES -23ANISTIC AND INST#23ENTAL %AL2ES (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;. C)arle% Alan Wrig)t and Aennet) W. =ra)a-D t)e a,t)or% o$ a 2ell"3no2n treati%e on evidenceD )ave de$ined t)e rationale $or privilege% not a% e-pirical b,t a% ),-ani%tic' !W)at 3ind o$ people are 2e 2)o e-po2er co,rt% in o,r na-e% to co-pel parent%D $riend%D and lover% to beco-e in$or-ant% on t)o%e 2)o )ave tr,%ted t)e-F! 8,t %,c) an et)ical %tandard leave% ,% 2it) t)e +,e%tionD In t)e %earc) $or tr,t) in trial%D 2)en %)o,ld co,rt% intr,de on con$idential co--,nication%F Early C,ri%pr,dential rationale% $or con$identiality r,le% ba%ed on ),-ani%tic t)eorie% Gt)at con$identiality pro-ote% decency by en%,ring privacyH and in%tr,-ental t)eorie% Gt)at con$identiality i% needed to pre%erve certain relation%)ip%H prevailed at di$$erent ti-e%. T)ey event,ally $,%edD and ,lti-ately beca-e one r,le t)at derive% $ro- bot) ideological %o,rce%. So-e %c)olar% ,%e t)e broad and %,bCective ter- personal autonom! to rationaliBe t)e ba%i% $or con$identiality. EFFECTI%E #EP#ESENTATION )$ CO2NSEL C#ITICAL TO PE#SONAL A2TONO3$ #I"-TS /artin (. "ardner' La4 Pro e!!or-2niver!ity o Ne.ra!5a' *+++' !T)e Si7t) A-end-ent (ig)t to Co,n%el and it% @nderlying 0al,e%' De$ining t)e Scope o$ Privacy ProtectionD! 15 9 Cri-. #. M Cri-inology 61*D p. 45*"1 In addition to trial $airne%% and attorney"client privacy concern%D t)e Co,rt )a% $oc,%ed on a,tono-y intere%t% o$ t)e acc,%ed a% an ,nderlying val,e o$ t)e Si7t) A-end-ent rig)t to co,n%el . For e7a-pleD in Faretta v. Cali$ornia t)e
S,pre-e Co,rt )eld t)at an acc,%ed 2)o !co-petently and intelligently! decide% to $orego )i% rig)t to be repre%ented by co,n%el i% entitled to cond,ct )i% o2n de$en%e 2it)o,t )aving a la2yer $orced ,pon )i- again%t )i% 2ill. T)e Co,rt gro,nded it%
recognition o$ t)e rig)t to proceed pro %e on t)e !ine%ti-able 2ort) o$ $ree c)oice! entailed a% an in)erent Si7t) A-end-ent val,e. T)e Co,rt e7plained t)e rationale $or it% )olding a% $ollo2%' T)e rig)t to de$end i% per%onal. T)e de$endantD and not )i% la2yer or t)e StateD 2ill bear t)e per%onal con%e+,ence% o$ a conviction. It i% t)e de$endant D t)ere$oreD 2)o -,%t be $ree per%onally to decide 2)et)er in )i% partic,lar ca%e co,n%el i% to )i% advantage. And alt)o,g) )e -ay cond,ct )i% o2n de$en%e ,lti-ately to )i% o2n detri-entD )i% c)oice -,%t be )onored o,t o$ !t)at re%pect $or t)e individ,al 2)ic) i% t)e li$eblood o$ t)e la2.!
T)e Co,rt<% ac3no2ledg-ent t)at e7erci%e o$ one<% rig)t to de$end one%el$ -ig)t redo,nd to )i% detri-ent i% a clear realiBation t)at t)e ,nderlying con%tit,tional val,e identi$ied in Faretta i% di$$erent $ro-D and per)ap% at odd% 2it)D t)e trial $airne%% val,e e%po,%ed in =ideon and /a%%ia). T)e Co,rt $,rt)er elaborated on t)e a,tono-y val,e in /cAa%3le v. Wiggin% 2)ic) addre%%ed t)e proble- o$ reconciling t)e de$endant<% rig)t to proceed pro %e in %it,ation% 2)ere %tandby co,n%el )a% been appointed to a%%i%t t)e de$endant 2it)o,t )i% con%ent. T)e /cAa%3le Co,rt rea$$ir-ed t)e rig)t to proceed pro %e a% an a$$ir-ation o$ !t)e dignity and a,tono-y o$ t)e acc,%ed.! Allo2ing t)at !occa%ionally! an acc,%ed proceeding pro %e -ig)t act,ally pre%ent )i% !be%t po%%ible de$en%eD! t)e Co,rt nevert)ele%% ac3no2ledged t)at in -o%t ca%e% !t)e rig)t o$ %el$"repre%entation i% a rig)t t)at 2)en e7erci%ed ,%,ally increa%e% t)e li3eli)ood o$ a trial o,tco-e ,n$avorable to t)e de$endant.! T),%D 2)ile vindicating t)e de$endant<% a,tono-yD e-ploy-ent o$ t)e rig)t to proceed pro %e o$ten co-pro-i%e% t)e de$endant<% intere%t in obtaining a $air trial.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E "#O2NDED IN #ESPECT FO# A2TONO3$ /ary C. Daly' La4 Pro e!!or-Ford(a& 2niver!ity' ://G' !E7ec,ting t)e Wrong Per%on' T)e Pro$e%%ional<% Et)ical Dile--a%!D ;1 #oy. #.A.#. (ev. 4&44D p. 4&;6"4 T)e arg,-ent% $or a,tono-y and privacy are $airly %traig)t$or2ard. T)ere i% a di%ting,i%)ed tradition in 2e%tern p)ilo%op)y en%)rining a,tono-y a% a $,nda-ental rig)t o$ all ),-an being%. T)i% rig)t i% critically t)reatened by
t)e increa%ing i-balance in po2er bet2een t)e %tate and t)e individ,al or bet2een private enterpri%e% and t)e individ,al. Al-o%t all co--ercial relation%)ip% and -any per%onal one% are %,bCect to reg,lation by t)e %tateD $or e7a-pleD t)e licen%ing o$ b,%ine%%e% and t)e licen%ing o$ -arriage%I private enterpri%e% ro,tinely intr,de into deci%ion% $or-erly con%idered a -atter o$ individ,al c)oiceD $or e7a-pleD )ealt) care.

T)e%e c)ange% lead to t)e ine%capable concl,%ion t)at in
454
-any i-portant area% o$ li$e t)e %,b%tantive and proced,ral co-ple7ity o$ t)e la2 -a3e t)e e7erci%e o$ in$or-ed a,tono-y in deci%ion"-a3ing and action virt,ally i-po%%ible $or individ,al% 2)o lac3 legal training. 0ie2ed $ro- t)i% per%pectiveD con$identiality beco-e% an indi%pen%able precondition. A,tono-y can be pre%erved only i$ client% con$ide $reely and 2it)o,t re%ervation in t)eir la2yer% . F,rt)er-oreD t)e interactive proce%% o$ la2yer"client co--,nication% $re+,ently re+,ire% a client to %)are deeply per%onal in$or-ationD $act% t)at t)e client ordinarily con%ider% !private! and Cealo,%ly g,ard% $rodi%clo%,re. Privacy i% t),% ine7tricably lin3ed to a,tono-y and con$identiality. Wit)o,t an a%%,rance o$ con$identialityD a client 2ill not CeopardiBe t)e privacy o$ inti-ate detail%. T)e nondi%clo%,re 2ill )obble t)e la2yer<% adviceD ,lti-ately corr,pting t)e client<% a,tono-y.
FinallyD it i% %o-eti-e% arg,ed t)at con$identiality pro-ote% virt,o,% cond,ct by la2yer%D e%pecially loyalty. In entering into a la2yer" client relation%)ipD la2yer% a%%,-e t)e per%ona o$ t)e ,lti-ate pro$e%%ional !$riend.! Friend%)ip i% i-po%%ible 2it)o,t loyalty " 2itne%% t)e co--on peCorative de%ignationD a !$ic3le $riend.! #oyalty de-and% t)at t)e la2yer %tic3 t)ro,g) t)e t)ic3"and" t)in o$ t)e attorney"client relation%)ip de%pite pro$o,nd re%ervation% abo,t t)e 2i%do- or t)e C,%tice o$ t)e client<% ca,%e or %trategy. T),%D in t)e endD t)e la2yer<% virt,e " loyalty " i% lin3ed to t)e client<% rig)t% " a,tono-y and privacy .
P#I%ILE"ES >2STIFIED )$ PE#SONAL A2TONO3$ Ed2ard I&4in5elried' La4 Pro e!!or' 2D CalD Davi!' ://;' !T)e (ivalry 8et2een Tr,t) and PrivilegeD! 41 :a%ting% #.9. 1&1D p. 1. "& T),%D i$ 2e are going to con%tr,ct a deontological ca%e $or evidentiary privilege%D privilege% -,%t be lin3ed to an ,lti-ate val,e or pri-ary good ot)er t)an privacy. A,tono-y i% t)e -o%t obvio,% candidate. It i% conceived a% an ,lti-ate val,e in a liberal de-ocratic %y%te%,c) a% o,r%. In a pl,rali%t %ocietyD t)e per%on )a% a %,b%tantial degree o$ a,tono-y to deter-ine t)e content o$ )i% or )er o2n li$e plan. In a liberal de-ocratic %ocietyD t)e individ,al citiBen i% a c)oo%erD and )e or %)e )a% t)e rig)t to %elect t)e pre$erence% 2)ic) de$ine )i% or )er li$e plan. T)e +,e%tion i% 2)et)er privacy and privilege can be lin3ed to a,tono-y. T)e e7i%tence o$ a lin3 i% )ardly %el$"evidentI indeedD t)e lin3 i% arg,ably co,nter"int,itive. A,tono-y i% o$ten vie2ed a% t)e rig)t to decide and act independentlyI it %ee-% to a%%,-e an ato-i%tic individ,al in %olit,de or i%olation. :o2everD relational privacy a%%,-e% an individ,al %it,ated in a co--,nity. JetD on clo%er %cr,tinyD t)ere i% a lin3. T)ere i% a %trong arg,-ent t)at in certain conte7t% in -odern %ocietyD
privacy i% e%%ential to t)e e$$ective e7erci%e o$ a,tono-y. /ore %peci$icallyD privacy pro-ote% a,tono-y by $acilitating intelligentD independent li$e pre$erence c)oice%. A% previo,%ly %tatedD a,tono-y i% t)e rig)t to -a3e c)oice% a% to certain pre$erence% . :o2everD t)e a,tono-y in +,e%tion i% not t)e a,tono-y o$ a %el$"%,$$icient )er-it or recl,%e i%olated $ro- %ocietyI againD it i% t)e a,tono-y o$ a %ocial being %it,ated in a %ociety. In %o-e conte7t%D t)e individ,al citiBen cannot -a3e an intelligentD a,tono-o,% c)oice ,nle%% )e or %)e i% g,aranteed t)e opport,nity to con%,lt t)ird partie% . I$ t)e per%on<% li$e
plan collide% 2it) t)at o$ anot)er citiBenD t)e per%on -ay need to re%ort to t)e litigation %y%te- to p,r%,e )i% or )er plan. T)e litigation %y%te- give% t)e individ,al t)e rig)t to -a3e c)oice% a% to t)e a%%ertion or 2aiver o$ %,b%tantive and proced,ral rig)t%. :o2everD t)e individ,al lac3% t)e e7perti%e to $,lly appreciate t)e con%e+,ence% o$ t)e c)oice%I t),%D a% t)e S,pre-e Co,rt it%el$ )a% re-ar3edD t)e individ,al need% !t)e g,iding )and o$ co,n%el! to -a3e t)o%e c)oice% in a re$lective -anner. #i3e2i%eD irre%pective o$ t)e content o$ t)e per%on<% li$e planD )e or %)e need% to -aintain p)y%ical and -ental )ealt) in order to e$$ectively p,r%,e t)e plan. O,r -edical care %y%te- a$$ord% t)e individ,al a 2ide range o$ c)oice%D b,t a% in t)e ca%e o$ t)e legal %y%te-D t)e individ,al lac3% t)e e7perti%e to ,nder%tand t)e $,ll range o$ c)oice. AgainD t)e individ,al )a% a %,b%tantial range o$ c)oice in %tr,ct,ring )i% or )er per%onal and $a-ily li$e. :o2everD a rational individ,al 2ill 2ant to 3no2 t)e pre$erence% o$ t)e ot)er per%on% directly a$$ected by t)o%e c)oice%. 8e$ore -a3ing a deci%ion t)at co,ld dra-atically a$$ect )i% or )er $a-ilyD any rational %po,%e 2o,ld 2ant to 3no2 t)e relevant a%pect% o$ t)e li$e plan o$ t)e ot)er %po,%e. In all t)e%e %etting%D a rig)t to con%,lt anot)er per%on i%
a condition $or t)e e$$ective e7erci%e o$ t)e citiBen<% a,tono-y. SOCIET$ S-O2LD ADOPT POLICIES T-AT P#O3OTE AND P#OTECT A2TONO3$ Ed2ard I&4in5elried' La4 Pro e!!or' 2D CalD Davi!' ://;' !T)e (ivalry 8et2een Tr,t) and PrivilegeD! 41 :a%ting% #.9. 1&1D p. 1.* At t)i% pointD 9o%ep) (aB< po%itive t)eory o$ $reedo- i% )ig)ly pertinent. A liberal de-ocratic %ociety %)o,ld not only intervene to protect a,tono-y 2)en t)e violation o$ a per%on<% a,tono-y i% certain or probable. /ore broadlyD %ociety %)o,ld act to create condition% cond,cive to a,tono-y " in t)i% %ettingD condition% t)at cond,ce to tr,ly a,tono-o,% li$e pre$erence c)oice. In partic,larD %ociety %)o,ld create condition% 2)ic) give t)e per%on good rea%on to tr,%t t)at t)e con%,ltant 2ill -a3e a bona $ide e$$ort to a%%i%t t)e per%on to -a3e an intelligentD independent c)oice .
45;
Attorney-Client Privilege Critical or Do&e!tic %iolence %icti&!

ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E IS A 3ATTE# OF LIFE AND DEAT- TO DO3ESTIC %IOLENCE %ICTI3S 9e$$rey (. )a5er' La4 Pro e!!or - Fa1l5ner 2niver!ity Sc(ool o La4' *+::' !Nece%%ary T)ird Partie%' /,ltidi%ciplinary Collaboration and Inade+,ate Pro$e%%ional Privilege% in Do-e%tic 0iolence PracticeD! ;4 Col,-. 9. =ender M #. ;.6D p. 6;*". T)i% t)eory o$ privilege re-ain% in A-erican la2D b,t a !),-ani%tic! t)eory al%o )a% ari%enD ba%ed in concern% o$ privacy and a,tono-y. 8eca,%e t)e attorney"client relation%)ip bear% on t)e client<% li$e and deci%ional a,tono-yD t)e client !)a% a rig)t to -a3e c)oice% 2it) re%pect ,nder t)e e7i%ting legal regi-eD incl,ding t)e C,%tice %y%te-. . . . W)en t)e per%on $or-% a relation%)ip 2it) an attorney to obtain advice abo,t t)o%e c)oice%D t)at relation%)ip %)o,ld be le$t largely <,n-ole%ted . . . by t)e %tate<.! According to t)e (e%tate-ent GT)irdH o$ t)e #a2 =overning #a2yer%D !KtL)e rationale $or t)e privilege i% t)at con$identiality en)ance% t)e val,e o$ t)e client"la2yer co--,nication% and )ence t)e e$$icacy o$ legal %ervice%.! T)i% rationale re%t% on t)ree related a%%,-ption%. Fir%tD beca,%e o$ t)e co-ple7ity and ,ncertainty o$ rig)t%D obligation% and -ode- legal proced,reD client% need la2yer% . SecondD a client 2)o con%,lt% 2it) a la2yer need% to di%clo%e all o$ t)e $act% to t)e la2yer and receive advice re$lecting t)o%e $act% to realiBe ade+,ate legal a%%i%tance. T)irdD 2it)o,t t)e privilegeD client% 2o,ld be rel,ctant to di%clo%e per%onalD e-barra%%ing or ,nplea%ant $act%. T)e%e a%%,-ption% are con%i%tent 2it) and )eig)tened in do-e%tic violence ca%e%. Con$identiality i% -ore t)an a -atter o$ %trategy or e-barra%%-ent $or a victi- o$ do-e%tic violence. Con$identiality i% a -atter o$ li$eD deat)D and liberation.
456
Attorney-Client Privilege #ecogni7ed in 3any Co1ntrie!

3AN$ CO2NT#IES P#OTECT ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. 64"; #a2% and pro$e%%ional code% t)at protect privileged co--,nication% are not ,ni+,e to t)e @nited State%. According to a recent report $ro- t)e E,ropean @nionD t)e practice o$ protecting con$identiality i% co--on abroadD e%pecially in t)e legal pro$e%%ion. Co--on"la2 co,ntrie% Gt)e @nited State% and t)e @nited Aingdopredo-inantlyH )ave di$$erent r,le% $ro- civil"la2 co,ntrie% GE,ropean co,ntrie%HD )o2everD and t)e%e di$$erence% are re$lected in t)eir r,le% regarding privileged co--,nication%.
454
Attorney-Client Privilege Serve! 31ltiple Societal Intere!t!

3AN$ LE"ITI3ATE SOCIAL ENDS SE#%ED )$ P#OTECTIN" SO3E CONFIDENTIALITIES (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. ;1 In )er boo3 )ecretsD t)e p)ilo%op)er Si%%ela 8o3 o$$er% $o,r -oral rationale% $or con$identiality. Fir%t and $ore-o%tD %)e propo%e%D i% t)e need $or individ,al a,tono-y over per%onal in$or-ation. People %)o,ld be able to )ave %ecret%""$or rea%on% o$ privacy and %el$"protection""e%pecially 2)ere t)i% doe% not con$lict 2it) t)e rig)t% o$ ot)er%.
:o2everD t)at rig)t -,%t be conditional' i$ a per%on i% in$ected 2it) a contagio,% and dangero,% di%ea%eD it 2o,ld be -orally 2rong to )id t)at $act $ro- innocent ot)er%. SecondD 8o3 %tate%D i% t)e need people )ave $or private relation%)ip% and loyaltie%
2it) $riend% and $a-ily and organiBation%. T)irdD 2)en a pro-i%e o$ %ilence i% -adeD an obligation -ay e7i%t $or contract,al rea%on%""in b,%ine%%D $or e7a-pleD partie% -ay are not to p,bliciBe trade %ecret%. T)e pro$e%%ional con$identiality o$ doctor%D attorney%D prie%t%D and ot)er pro$e%%ional% i% 8o3<% $inal categoryI it i% pre-i%ed on t)e val,e to %ociety in protecting t)e privacy o$ t)e%e relation%)ip%. Since all t)e%e re$,ge% o$ %ecrecy can ca,%e proble-%D regardle%% o$ t)e val,e o$ t)eir rationale%D 8o3 C,dicio,%ly %,gge%t% t)at t)eir invocation %)o,ld be con%idered pri-a $acieD and %)o,ld be %,bCect to e7ception%I $or e7a-pleD a doctor %)o,ld not di%clo%e a patient<% %ecret% $or
go%%ipD b,t )e -ig)t 2ell do %o to prevent a %,icide.
ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E )#OADL$ #ECO"NIBED 8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. 4"; Every developed legal %y%teprovide% %pecial protection to co--,nication% bet2een la2yer% and t)eir client%. S,c) protection i% generally not available to co--,nication% 2it) ot)er cla%%e% o$ pro$e%%ional advi%er. In Engli%) la2 t)i% %pecial protection i% 3no2n a% legal pro$e%%ional privilege D 2)ic) e7tend% to cover a broader range o$ co--,nication% and doc,-ent% generated in t)e conte7t o$ litigation. I$ categoriBation i% %o,g)tD legal pro$e%%ional privilege can per)ap% be%t be de%cribed a% a %pecie% o$ con$idence. For at it% root lie% t)e obligation o$ con$idence
2)ic) a legal advi%er o2e% )i% client in relation to con$idential co--,nication% pa%%ing bet2een t)e- or t)e con$identiality attac)ing to doc,-ent% 2)ic) <$or- part o$ t)e brie$< in t)e preparation o$ a party $or t)e p,rpo%e% o$ adver%arial litigation. It )a% been
de%cribed by t)e S,pre-e Co,rt o$ t)e @nited State% a% !t)e olde%t $ t)e privilege% $or con$idential in$or-ation 3no2n to t)e co--on la2.! P#I%ILE"E )ENEFITS P2)LIC INTE#EST IN CLIENTS "ETTIN" "OOD LE"AL AD%ICE 8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. 44
T)e general policyD applicable bot) to contentio,% and non"contentio,% -atter%D 2a% t),% e7plained by 8arone%% :ale in Three Rivers , in t)e $ollo2ing ter-%' !#egal advice privilege re%trict% t)e po2er o$ a co,rt to co-pel t)e prod,ction o$ 2)at 2o,ld ot)er2i%e be relevant evidence. It -ay t),% i-pede t)e proper ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice in t)e individ,al ca%e. T)i% -a3e% t)e co--,nication% covered di$$erent $ro- -o%t ot)er type% o$ con$idential co--,nicationD 2)ere t)e need to enco,rage cando,r -ay be C,%t a% great. 8,t t)e privilege i% too 2ell e%tabli%)ed in t)e co--on la2 $or it% e7i%tence to be do,bted no2 . And t)ere i% a clear policy C,%ti$ication $or %ingling o,t co--,nication% bet2een la2yer% and t)eir client% $root)er pro$e%%ional co--,nication%. T)e privilege belong% to t)e clientD b,t it attac)e% bot) to 2)at t)e client tell% )i% la2yer and to 2)at t)e la2yer advi%e% )i% client to do. It i% in t)e intere%t% o$ t)e 2)ole co--,nity t)at la2yer% give t)eir client% %o,nd adviceD acc,rate a% to t)e la2 and %en%ible a% to t)eir cond,ct . T)e client -ay not al2ay% act ,pon t)at advice...b,t t)ere i% al2ay% a c)ance t)at )e 2ill And t)ere i% little or no c)ance o$ t)e client ta3ing t)e rig)t or %en%ible co,r%e
i$ t)e la2yer<% advice i% inacc,rate or ,n%o,nd beca,%e t)e la2yer )a% been given an inco-plete or inacc,rate pict,re o$ t)e client<% po%ition.!
45
AT, "Attorney-Client Privilege Tr1&p! Ot(er Societal Intere!t!"

P#I%ILE"E IS NA##OWL$ CONST#2ED AND )ALANCED A"AINST OT-E# INTE#ESTS Nancy 9. 3oore' La4 Pro e!!or-#1tger!' :/;<F:/;GD !#i-it% to Attorney"Client Con$identiality' A <P)ilo%op)ically In$or-ed< And Co-parative Approac) to #egal and /edical Et)ic%D! 6& Ca%e. W. (e%. 4**D p. ;56 None o$ t)e above i% -eant to %,gge%t t)at t)ere 2ill never be %it,ation% in 2)ic) t)e client<% intere%t in con$identiality o,t2eig)% t)e intere%t% o$ ot)er% in avoiding )ar- D per)ap% even %erio,% )ar-. T)e only concl,%ion to be dra2n at t)i% %tage i% t)at t)e )i%torical develop-ent o$ t)e principle o$ con$identiality )a% re%,lted in a -i%g,ided and ,nd,e e-p)a%i% on t)e te%ti-onial privilegeD 2)ic) )a% in t,rn led to t)e -i%ta3enD b,t prevalentD a%%,-ption t)at t)e la2 it%el$ e-bodie% a broad tradition 2)ere con$identiality al-o%t al2ay% ta3e% precedence over ot)er intere%t%. ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E NOT A)SOL2TE -- CAN )E WEI"-ED A"AINST OT-E# SOCIETAL INTE#ESTS Nancy 9. 3oore' La4 Pro e!!or-#1tger!' :/;<F:/;GD !#i-it% to Attorney"Client Con$identiality' A <P)ilo%op)ically In$or-ed< And Co-parative Approac) to #egal and /edical Et)ic%D! 6& Ca%e. W. (e%. 4**D p. ;64"; At t)e o,t%etD it -,%t be noted t)atD 2it) t)e e7ception o$ t)e pre%ent di%clo%,re r,le%D t)e obligation to )onor client a,tono-y 2it)in t)e la2 i% not pre%ently accorded t)e %tat,% o$ an ab%ol,te obligation . Alt)o,g) t)e c,rrent
/odel Code re+,ire% a la2yer to p,r%,e !t)e la2$,l obCective% o$ )i% client t)ro,g) rea%onably available -ean% per-itted by la2D!
e7ception% are recogniBed bot) $or a la2yer 2)o !e7erci%e% )i% pro$e%%ional C,dg-ent to 2aive or $ail to a%%ert a rig)t or po%ition o$ )i% client! and $or a la2yer 2)o re$,%e% !to aid or participate in cond,ct t)at )e believe% to be ,nla2$,lD even t)o,g) t)ere i% %o-e %,pport $or an arg,-ent t)at t)e cond,ct i% legal .! W)ile t)e recognition o$ t)e%e and ot)er e7ception% by no -ean% entail% di%clo%,re in t)e%e circ,-%tance%D it doe% clearly reb,t any arg,-ent again%t %,c) di%clo%,re ba%ed %olely on an ab%ol,te d,ty to )onor client a,tono-y 2it)in t)e bo,nd% o$ t)e la2. T)e +,e%tion re-ain% 2)et)er t)ere are ot)er con%ideration%D -ore directly related to t)e pri-a $acie obligation
o$ con$identialityD t)at 2o,ld %,pport a re$,%al to per-it di%clo%,re%D even to prevent deat) or %,b%tantial bodily )ar-D %o long a% t)e client intend% a clearlyD or even arg,ablyD la2$,l act.
45&
AT, "Privilege Decrea!e! Legiti&acyFP1.lic #e!pect or Co1rt!"

P#I%ILE"E INC#EASES T-E LE"ITI3AC$ OF T-E >2STICE S$STE3 -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' I. Introd,ction' T)e Develop-ent o$ Evidentiary Privilege% in A-erican #a2D! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 441."1 (at)er t)an being %een a% a -ean% o$ enco,raging co--,nication%D protecting privacyD or acco--odating po2erD e7i%ting privilege la2 -ay al%o be ,nder%tood a% a -ean% o$ pre%erving t)e i-age and legiti-acy o$ t)e legal %y%te-. According to t)e i-age t)eoryD co,rt% and legi%lat,re% )ave e%tabli%)ed t)e %et o$ e7i%ting privilege% beca,%e t)ey -ini-iBe po%%ible e-barra%%-ent to t)e legal %y%te-. T)e di%trib,tion o$ privilege% -ini-iBe% t)i% e-barra%%-ent in t2o 2ay%' G4H it -a%3% t)e %y%te-<% po%%ible incapacity to co-pel obedienceD and G;H it -ini-iBe% t)e po%%ibility o$ di%covering $act% a$ter trial t)at 2o,ld ,nder-ine t)e credibility o$ t)e C,dg-ent% reac)ed. Fir%tD privilege )older% %ee- to con%tit,te t)o%e gro,p% -o%t li3ely to re%pond to a co,rt order by lying or by re$,%ing to te%ti$y. T)ey are bo,nd by %trong loyaltie% or oat)% o$ con$identialityD o$ten %,pported by pro$e%%ional code% o$ et)ic% and t)e t)reat o$ pro$e%%ional %anction%. A co,rt con$ronted 2it) eit)er perC,ry or a
re$,%al to te%ti$y 2o,ld )ave t2o e-barra%%ing option%' it co,ld eit)er ignore t)e 2itne%%<% p,blic di%obedienceD or t)ro2 t)e prie%tD %po,%eD la2yerD or doctor in Cail. Ignoring di%obedience 2o,ld red,ce re%pect $or C,dicial co--and%I Cailing
2itne%%e% 2o,ld probably generate p,blic %y-pat)y $or t)e re%ol,te 2itne%% and )o%tility to2ard t)e co,rt . SecondD relative to ot)er% %ee3ing privilege%D t)o%e no2 )olding privilege% are arg,ably le%% li3ely to di%clo%eD a$ter t)e verdictD in$or-ation t)at t)ey 2ere privileged $rodi%clo%ing in co,rt. Alt)o,g) t)i% arg,-ent doe% not
a$$ir-atively C,%ti$y t)e creation o$ a privilegeD it doe% C,%ti$y t)e di%tinction -ade bet2een t)o%e no2 privileged and t)o%e not privileged. 8eca,%e t)e legiti-acy o$ t)e legal %y%te- depend% on t)e acceptability o$ it% verdict% a% credible
deter-ination% o$ 2)at )appenedD %o-eone 2)o invo3ed a privilege and later revealed in$or-ation t)at proved t)e verdict 2rong co,ld %erio,%ly ,nder-ine t)e %y%te-<% legiti-acy. C,rrent privilege )older%D t)ro,g) %,c) -ean% a% et)ical code%D in%tit,tional proced,re%D or deeply )eld loyaltie%D provide %o-e a%%,rance t)at t)e%e e-barra%%ing revelation% are ,nli3ely to occ,r. Nonprivileged gro,p% on t)e 2)ole are probably le%% able to re%train t)eir
-e-ber% $ro- -a3ing %,c) revelation%D and t),% privileging one o$ t)e%e gro,p% -ay carry a greater ri%3 o$ delegiti-ating t)e legal %y%te-.
ELI3INATIN" P#I%ILE"E 2NDE#3INES CO2#T LE"ITI3AC$ -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' I. Introd,ction' T)e Develop-ent o$ Evidentiary Privilege% in A-erican #a2D! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 4 55
Co,rt%D t)enD even i$ acting a% /ac)iavellian po2er"-a7i-iBer%D 2o,ld be ,nli3ely to try to eradicate privilege la2. (at)erD t)ey 2o,ld 2eig) legiti-ating and delegiti-ating $orce% and %ee3 t)at array o$ privilege% t)at -a7i-iBe% t)e overall legiti-acy o$ t)e co,rt. Alt)o,g) eli-inating all privilege% -ig)t -a7i-iBe C,dicial po2er over 2itne%%e%D it 2o,ld probably
lo2er t)e overall legiti-acyD and t)ere$ore t)e po2erD o$ t)e co,rt%. T)e interpretation o$ %tat,tory privilege% by co,rt% 2ill t),% repre%ent not only t)e e+,ilibration o$ legiti-ating and delegiti-ating $orce%D b,t al%o t)e %tr,ggle $or po2er bet2een C,dicial and private $orce%.
45*
AT, "Wrong to Separate W(at i! Legal ro& W(at i! 3oral"

8ANTIAN P-ILOSOP-$ >2STIFIES DI%ISION )ETWEEN W-AT IS LE"AL AND W-AT IS 3O#AL T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. ; ."1 T)e ,nderlying t)in3ing t)at %,pport% %,c) gro%% pa%%ivity and indi$$erence in t)e la2 can be traced D ,nintentionallyD to t)e p)ilo%op)y o$ I--an,el Aant. IndeedD t)e in$l,ence o$ Aant can )elp e7plain a good deal o$ 2)at pa%%e% $or i--oral C,%tice in A-erica. For AantD t)e -oral and legal are nat,rally and ine7orably %eparate. :e 2o,ld be plea%ed and it 2o,ld )ave co-e to )i- a% no %,rpri%e t)at t)e A-erican legal %y%te- $oc,%e% on one and ignore% t)e ot)er. Fro- a Aantian per%pectiveD -oral d,tie% do not po%%e%% a legal co,nterpart . We %)o,ld %i-ply
re%ign o,r%elve% to t)e $act t)at people 2)o do t)e rig)t -oral t)ing are %i-ply better t)an t)e re%t o$ ,%. T)ey )ave -ore virt,eD and t)ere$ore cond,ct t)e-%elve% -ore virt,o,%ly. T)eir -otivation co-e% $ro- 2it)inI it i% part o$ t)eir %pirit,al and per%onal -a3e,p t)at -a3e% t)e- act in t)e 2ay t)at t)ey do.
According to AantD t)e la2 )a% no application in t)e %pirit,al %p)ere o$ ),-an e7i%tence. T)e la2 i% abo,t reg,lating e7ternal cond,ctD loo3ing at 2)at people )ave act,ally doneD and C,dging t)e la2$,lne%% o$ t)o%e action%. T)e la2D )o2everD %)o,ld not be involved in $orcing people to do 2)at t)ey ot)er2i%e 2o,ld not do on t)eir o2n. T)e la2 %i-ply can<t co-pel citiBen% to be virt,o,%. We are all better o$$ 2)en virt,e e7i%t% in t)e general pop,lationD and 2e are 2or%e o$$ 2)en it i% ab%ent. Jet in Aant<% vie2D yo, can re2ard people $or being better ),-an being%D and yo, can %,bCect t)o%e 2)o are not to -oral cen%,reD b,t yo, can<t legally re+,ire t)e- to act again%t t)eir nat,re.
45.
AT, "Attorney Client Privilege Protect! t(e Po4er 1l"

>2ST )ECA2SE P#I%ILE"E LAW AND POWE# 3A$ INTE#SECT DOES NOT 3EAN IT S-O2LD )E #E>ECTED -arvard La4 #evie4' :/;<D !Privileged Co--,nication' I. Introd,ction' T)e Develop-ent o$ Evidentiary Privilege% in A-erican #a2D! 1. :arv. #. (ev. 44 5D p. 441&"*
8ot) vie2% o$ t)e po2er t)eory %)o,ld be reCected beca,%e t)ey proceed on an e%%entially -i%g,ided notion o$ t)e nat,re o$ e-pirical and nor-ative c)oice. #egal and political deci%ion% are ,%,ally in$or-ed by a %ocial vi%ion t)at incorporate% partic,lar a%%,-ption% abo,t ),-an be)avior and val,e%. T)e $act t)at t)e %ocial vi%ionD not t)e privilege la2 C,%ti$icationD %,pplie% t)e%e ,nderlying a%%,-ption% doe% not %)o2 t)at %,c) rationale% are inco)erent . (at)erD t)e co)erence o$ privilege la2 C,%ti$ication% lie% in t)eir ability to i%olate t)o%e e-pirical and
nor-ative a%%,-ption% relevant to deci%ion-a3ing. Nor doe% t)e $act t)at political po2er in$l,ence% t)e a%%,-ption% -ade %)o2 t)at %,c) rationale% are applied illegiti-ately. IndeedD t)e legiti-acy o$ t)e%e deci%ion% re+,ire% t)at t)e a%%,-ption% be politically in$l,enced. T)i% analy%i% t),% dra2% a +,ite di$$erent i-plication $ro- t)e po2er t)eory' it reco--end% t)at privilege t)eory concentrate not on !obCectively! deter-ining 2)ic) be)avioral and nor-ative a%%,-ption% to adopt D nor on e7cl,ding political inp,tD b,t on providing a $or,- t)at be%t $acilitate% t)e $or- o$ political inp,t t)at %ociety dee-% -o%t legiti-ate. Deciding 2)ic) $or- o$ political inp,t i% -o%t legiti-ate clearly re+,ire% -a3ing a nor-ative c)oice. Nevert)ele%%D -o%t -e-ber% o$ o,r %ociety probably %)are t)e belie$ t)at re%pon%ivene%% to t)e need% and inp,t
o$ -any peopleD partic,larly t)o%e people 2)o 2ill be a$$ected by any partic,lar deci%ion%D i% t)e -o%t legiti-ating $eat,re deci%ion-a3ing can )ave. A%%,-ing t)at t)i% vie2 o$ legiti-acy i% %)ared by %ocietyD 2)at can be %aid abo,t t)e legiti-acy o$ o,r %y%te- o$ -a3ing privilege la2F Al-o%t all o$ t)e ne2er privilege% )ave been created by %tat,te. Co,rt%D 2)ile generally pro$e%%ing an in%tit,tional inco-petence to create any privilege% on t)eir o2nD )ave con%tr,ed %tat,tory privilege% narro2ly. T)e po2er t)eory arg,e% t)at bot) legi%lative and C,dicial deci%ion% on privilege la2 are in$l,enced by po2er$,l -inoritie% %ee3ing to advance t)eir %el$"intere%t. T)e +,e%tion re-ain%D )o2everD 2)et)er t)e i-per$ect political inp,t o$ po2er$,l -inoritie% i% per %e delegiti-ating or
2)et)er it co,ld ever act,ally legiti-ate privilege la2. I$ deci%ion% abo,t privilege la2 2ere -ade 2it) e7plicit re$erence o$ t)e political po2er o$ t)e gro,p% involvedD t)e deci%ion% 2o,ld nece%%arily be delegiti-ated. 8,t a% long a% privilege la2% are C,%ti$ied D albeit on t)e ba%i% o$ ,nveri$iable a%%,-ption% abo,t be)avior and val,eD t)e conto,r% o$ privilege la2 2ill be %)aped by t)e predo-inant %ocial vi%ion. Nat,rallyD t)e -ore po2er$,l a gro,p i%D t)e -ore li3ely it i% t)at it% vi%ion o$ be)avior and val,e 2ill predo-inate. 8,t co-peting vi%ion% o$ be)avioral pattern% and %ocial val,e% 2ill al2ay% e7i%t. T)e acceptability o$ any partic,lar vi%ion to ot)er gro,p% 2ill deter-ine bot) 2)et)er t)at vi%ion predo-inate% andD
conco-itantlyD t)e po2er o$ t)e gro,p pro-oting t)at vi%ion. 8eca,%eD a% a practical -atterD t)e -aintenance o$ po2er re+,ire% t)e po2er$,l to gain t)e ac+,ie%cence o$ t)e le%% po2er$,lD a co-pro-i%e e+,ilibri,- 2ill be reac)ed t)at advance% t)e intere%t% o$ t)e po2er$,l 2)ile acco--odating t)e intere%t% o$ t)e le%% po2er$,l . In t)i% regardD t)e nat,re o$
privilege la2 i% no di$$erent $ro- t)e nat,re o$ -o%t la2 in a de-ocratic %ociety. P#I%ILE"E P#OTECTS CLIENTS NOT LAW$E#S 8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. 4*". T)e privilege belong% to t)e client and not to )i% la2yer or agent. Only t)e client can invo3e t)e privilege.
It i% not open to a la2yer or ot)er agent to do %oD ,nle%% acting on be)al$ o$ t)e clientD and t)e la2yer or agent cannot invo3e t)e privilege i$ t)e client )a% 2aived it. Privileged in$or-ation or doc,-ent% cannot t)ere$ore be di%clo%ed 2it)o,t t)e client<% con%ent. T)e rig)t to 2aive t)e privilege i% al%o t)at o$ t)e client and not t)e la2yer or agent D b,t t)e client<% legal advi%er% are dee-ed to act 2it) t)e client<% a,t)ority in t)e cond,ct o$ litigation and t)eir act% or o-i%%ion% -ay t)ere$ore )ave t)e e$$ect o$ 2aiving privilege on t)e client<% be)al$ even 2)ere %,c) 2aiver i% inadvertent and contrary to t)e client<% intere%t%.
451
AT, "Attorney! are Agent! o t(e Co1rt"

LAW$E#=S #OLE AS AN A"ENT OF T-E CO2#T DOES NOT 3EAN T-E$ A#E A"ENTS OF T-E STATE (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &4 A -oral co-ple7ity )a% been noted by t)e p)ilo%op)y pro$e%%or 8r,ce #ande%-an' Doe% a re+,ire-ent t)at la2yer% di%clo%e certain categorie% o$ client co--,nication% -a3e t)e- !agent% o$ t)e %tate!' O$ co,r%eD la2yer% are agent% o$ t)e co,rt%D b,t t)at i% di$$erent $ro- being $orced to be agent% o$ t)e police or pro%ec,tion again%t t)eir client%.
445
S(o1ld Not ECe&pt EConerating Evidence Fro& AttorneyClient Privilege

D2T$ TO #ESC2E 2NDE#3INES LI)E#T$ T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. ; 1 A -oral legal %y%te- 2o,ld -a3e no di%tinction% bet2een -oral and legal d,tie% . 8,t $reedo- $ro- legally -andated -oral obligation i% one o$ t)e -any libertie% t)at A-erican% po%%e%%. In %o-e 2ay% it i% t)e g,iding et)o% o$ 2)at it -ean% to be an A-erican' o,r national ob%e%%ion 2it) $reedo- and a,tono-y. T)e%e All" A-erican principle% -a3e i-po%ing a d,ty to re%c,e nearly i-po%%ible 2it)in o,r legal %y%te-. (e+,iring %,c) a d,ty 2o,ld i-pinge %everely on one<% overall liberty. It 2o,ld $orce one to actD even -ini-allyD in a %it,ation 2)ere )e -ay
not 2i%) to.
444
S(o1ld Not Con or& Attorney-Client to Sa&e Standard! a! DrDFPatient Con identiality
#ATIONALE FO# D#FPATIENT AND ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"ES DISTINCT T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;& Practicing attorney% -aintain t)at t)e legal and -edical pro$e%%ion% are not %i-ilar in t)i% regardD and t)at<% 2)y t)e privilege r,le% operate di$$erently. A$ter allD patient% don<t vi%it doctor% beca,%e t)ey are %,$$ering $ro- a %ecret Galt)o,g) t)ey -ay 2i%) to 3eep t)eir illne%% a %ecretHD nor do t)ey %ee3 o,t doctor% on t)e ba%i% o$ )o2 2ell t)e doctor can 3eep a %ecret. 8,t a per%on 2)o need% a la2yer% 2ill not vi%it one 2)o cannot be tr,%ted to -aintain a con$idence.
44;
Privilege Narro4ly Con!tr1cted, Care 1lly )alanced

P#I%ILE"E NOT A)SOL2TE -- IS )EIN" WEI"-ED 8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. vii To t)i% general r,le t)ere i% one ab%ol,teD or all b,t ab%ol,teD e7ception' -aterial% bearing on legal advice %o,g)t or givenD and -aterial% 2)ic) co-e into e7i%tence $or t)e p,rpo%e o$ litigationD are privileged $rodi%clo%,re. T)i%
e7ception to t)e general r,le 2a% 2ell ,nder%tood and %ettled year% ago. Or 2a% itF T)e e7ceptional nat,re o$ t)i% privilege D and t)e %,%picion o$ litigating partie% t)at t)e -aterial $or 2)ic) t)eir opponent% claiprivilege contain% an ar-ory o$ %-o3ing g,n%D )ave one de-on%trable re%,lt' t)at t)e nat,reD content%D and bo,nd% o$ t)e privilege are con%tantly te%tedD c)allengedD and e7plored . In recent pa%tD C,dge% at $ir%t in%tanceD in t)e Co,rt o$ AppealD in t)e :o,%e o$ #ord%D and in t)e Privy Co,ncil )ave all been re+,ired to r,le on vario,% $eat,re% o$ t)e privilege. It i% not a %traig)t$or2ard %,bCect .
446
Privilege Narro4ly Con!tr1cted, Prevent Deat( or )odily -ar&

ATTO#NE$S CAN )#EA8 P#I%ILE"E TO P#E%ENT DEAT- O# )ODIL$ -A#3 T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 4;6 T)e A-erican 8ar A%%ociation<% r,le% regarding t)e 3eeping o$ client con$idence% "" a% e-bodied in it% /odel Code o$ Cond,ct""-andate% t)at in all ca%e% t)e privilege %)o,ld be -aintained D b,t allo2% $or di%clo%,re !only to prevent a cri-inal act t)at t)e la2yer believe% i% li3ely to re%,lt in i--inent deat) or %,b%tantial bodily )ar-.! @nder t)i% rigidly narro2 %tandardD very $e2 con$idence% 2o,ld )ave $allen o,t%ide t)e privilege. In ;554D t)e A8A rela7ed t)e privilege %lig)tly by allo2ing la2yer% to breac) client con$identiality !to prevent rea%onably certain deat) or %,b%tantial bodily )ar-.!
444
Privilege Narro4ly Con!tr1cted, Cri&e-Fra1d ECception

C#I3E-F#A2D E9CEPTION LI3ITS ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E 9e$$rey (. )a5er' La4 Pro e!!or - Fa1l5ner 2niver!ity Sc(ool o La4' *+::' !Nece%%ary T)ird Partie%' /,ltidi%ciplinary Collaboration and Inade+,ate Pro$e%%ional Privilege% in Do-e%tic 0iolence PracticeD! ;4 Col,-. 9. =ender M #. ;.6D p. 664"& Pre%entlyD t)e attorney"client privilege i% codi$ied in %tate code% o$ pro$e%%ional cond,ct and in r,le% o$ evidence. W)ile con$identiality i% t)e pro$e%%ional d,ty to 3eep a client<% co--,nication% %ecretD privilege i% t)e rig)t to 3eep t)at con$idence in co,rt""%peci$icallyD t)e privilege to re$,%e to te%ti$y regarding t)e con$idential co--,nication de%pite co-p,l%ory di%covery and evidentiary r,le%. Attorney"client privilege in t)e $ederal conte7t e7tend% $ro- (,le 54 o$ t)e Federal (,le% o$ EvidenceD 2)ic) re$er% to t)e privilege a% it e7i%t% and evolve% in t)e co--on la2 a% 2ell a% ba%ed in part on t)e !rea%on and e7perience! o$ t)e co,rt%. :o2everD in @nited State% v. >olinD an early S,pre-e Co,rt ca%e con%tr,ing t)e attorney"client privilege ,nder (,le 54D t)e Co,rt recogniBed t)at t)e privilege )a% li-it%' T)e attorney"client privilege i% not 2it)o,t it% co%t%. !KSLince t)e privilege )a% t)e e$$ect o$ 2it))olding relevant in$or-ation $ro- t)e $act$inderD it applie% only 2)ere nece%%ary to ac)ieve it% p,rpo%e .! T)e attorney"client privilege -,%t nece%%arily protect t)e con$idence% o$ 2rongdoer%D b,t t)e rea%on $or t)at protection"" t)e centrality o$ open client and attorney co--,nication to t)e proper $,nctioning o$ o,r adver%ary %y%te- o$ C,%tice""!cea%Ke%L to operate at a certain pointD na-elyD 2)ere t)e de%ired advice re$er% not to prior 2rongdoingD b,t to $,t,re 2rongdoing.! It i% t)e p,rpo%e o$ t)e cri-e"$ra,d e7ception to t)e attorney"client
privilege to a%%,re t)at t)e !%eal o$ %ecrecy! bet2een la2yer and client doe% not e7tend to co--,nication% !-ade $or t)e p,rpo%e o$ getting advice $or t)e co--i%%ion o$ a $ra,d! or cri-e.
C#I3E-F#A2D E9CEPTION IS A #EASONA)LE )ALANCE OF CO3PETIN" INTE#ESTS (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &6"4 S,pporter% o$ t)e attorney"client privilege arg,e t)at t)ere i% no %ocial co%t to t)e privilege D beca,%e 2it)o,t it t)e client 2o,ld not )ave provided t)e incri-inating evidence in t)e $ir%t place. /orallyD it 2o,ld be a% 2rong $or attorney% to be -ade into in$or-er% a% it 2o,ld be to $orce t)e- to beco-e !a cloa3 $or cri-inal con%piracyD! one co--entator arg,ed. Dra2ing a di%tinction bet2een advice abo,t prior 2rongdoing% GprivilegedH and $,t,re 2rongdoing Gnot privilegedH %tri3e% a rea%onable balance. P#I%ILE"E DOES NOT P#OTECT 8NOWLED"E OF F#A2D O# C#I3E 8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. 41. T)e rea%on $or t)e e7ception i% per)ap% obvio,%' it i% not in t)e intere%t% o$ C,%tice to protect co--,nication% -ade in $,rt)erance o$ a cri-inal or $ra,d,lent p,rpo%e. In Williams v 1ue%rada Railwa!, +and and #opper #ompan!. Ae3e2ic)
9 e7plained t)e e7ception a% $ollo2%' !It i% o$ t)e )ig)e%t i-portanceD in t)e $ir%t placeD t)at t)e r,le a% to privilege o$ protection $ro- a prod,ction to an opponent o$ t)o%e co--,nication% 2)ic) pa%% bet2een a litigantD or an e7pectant or po%%ible litigantD and )i% %olicitor %)o,ld not be in any 2ay departed $ro-. :o2ever )ardly t)e r,le -ay operate in %o-e ca%e%D long e7perience )a% %)e2n t)at it i% e%%ential to t)e d,e ad-ini%tration o$ C,%tice t)at t)e privilege %)o,ld be ,p)eld. On t)e ot)er )andD 2)ere t)ere i% anyt)ing o$ an ,nder)and nat,re or approac)ing to $ra,dD e%pecially in co--ercial -atter%D 2)ere t)ere %)o,ld be t)e verie%t good $ait)D t)e
2)ole tran%action %)o,ld be ripped ,p and di%clo%ed in all it% na3edne%% to t)e lig)t o$ t)e Co,rt. In $oc,%ing ,pon t)e rationale $or t)e r,leD one can %ee 2)y it )a% been %aid t)at t)e cri-e?$ra,d e7ception i% not %o -,c) an e7ception to legal pro$e%%ional privilegeD a% a -ar3 at t)e o,ter bo,nd% o$ t)e de$inition o$ privilege . It
)a% been %,gge%ted t)at it i% not t)at t)e privilege t)at 2o,ld ot)er2i%e ari%e to protect t)e co--,nication% i% o,%tedD b,t rat)er t)at t)e co--,nication% never beco-e privileged at all in %,c) circ,-%tance%. :o2everD it i% %,gge%ted t)at t)e correct analy%i% i% t)at t)e r,le doe% operate a% a proced,ral exception to legal pro$e%%ional privilege. T)i% i% beca,%e it 2o,ld not be correct to %ay t)at t)e co--,nication% 2ere never privileged i$ t)e allegation o$ cri-e or $ra,d t,rn% o,t to be ,n$o,nded Galt)o,g) t)e privilege -ay )ave been $r,%trated i$ t)e e7ception i% invo3ed in %,c) circ,-%tance%.H
44
Privilege Narro4ly Con!tr1cted, Et(ical D1ty to Di!clo!e Per61ry

ATTO#NE$S -A%E AFFI#3ATI%E D2T$ TO P#E%ENTF#EPO#T PE#>2#ED TESTI3ON$ T)ane #o!en.a1&' La4 Pro e!!or Ford(a& 2niver!ity @ Noveli!t' *++A' T)e /yt) o$ /oral 9,%tice' W)y O,r #egal Sy%te- Fail% to Do W)at<% (ig)tD p. 454"
In addition to cri-inal penaltie%D t)ere are pro$e%%ional et)ical re+,ire-ent% t)at pro)ibit perC,ry a% 2ell. 8a%ed on t)e -odel Code o$ Pro$e%%ional (e%pon%ibility and t)e /odel (,le% o$ Pro$e%%ional Cond,ctD %tate bar a%%ociation% i-po%e r,le% on la2yer%
not to pre%ent te%ti-ony or evidence in co,rt t)at t)e attorney eit)er 3no2% to be $al%eD or rea%onably believe% to be $al%e. T)e et)ical d,ty e7tend% even $,rt)er by re+,iring attorney% to di%clo%e 2)en a client i% abo,t to co--it perC,ry. I$ attorney% $ail in t)eir a$$ir-ative et)ical d,tie% to 3eep perC,ry o,t o$ t)e co,rtroo-D t)ey can be %,bCect to cri-inal pro%ec,tionD and even di%bar-ent $ro- t)e practice o$ la2.
44&
Privilege Narro4ly Con!tr1cted, Con ined to Act1al Attorney!

P#I%ILE"E NA##OWL$ CONFINED TO ACT2AL ATTO#NE$S (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. &* W)et)er t)e attorney"client relation%)ip e7i%t%D and t),% 2)et)er t)e attorney"client privilege applie%D i% %cr,tiniBed con%ervatively by co,rt%. In order $or t)e attorney"client privilege to applyD a pro$e%%ional legal advi%er -,%t provide legal advice. W)enD $or e7a-pleD ,nion o$$icial% $or t)e Patrol-en<% 8enevolent A%%ociation o$ Ne2 Jor3 City
%o,g)t to clai- t)e privilege 2it) re%pect to t)e advice it provided to ,nion -e-ber% regarding a $ederal cri-inal inve%tigationD t)e co,rt r,led t)at no privilege attac)ed to protect t)o%e co--,nication%I being a3in to a legal advi%er i% not %,$$icient.
44*
Terrori!& An!4er!, P1.lic Intere!t in Preventing Terrori!& Tr1&p! Attorney-Client Privilege

TE##O#IS3 T-#EATS CAN T#23P ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E (onald "old ar.' Attorney' *++/' In Con$idence' W)en to Protect Secrecy and W)en to (e+,ire Di%clo%,reD p. .6 Po%t"Septe-ber 44 civil"libertie% c,rtail-ent% by t)e $ederal govern-ent )ave i-pinged on t)e )i%torical attorney"client privilege. T)e Patriot Act per-it% govern-ent eave%dropping G-onitoringH on conver%ation% bet2een i-pri%oned de$endant%D detainee%D and t)eir la2yer%. Intercepted co--,nication% are revie2ed by a !privilege! teato deter-ine i$ terrori%- i% i--inent. T)e tea- i% not ne,tralI nor i% it acco,ntable $or it% deci%ion% . Traditional %a$eg,ard% o$ t)e C,%tice %y%te- 2ere dee-ed contrary to t)e p,blic intere%t in t)i% ti-e o$ e-ergencyD Attorney =eneral 9o)n A%)cro$t anno,nced.
44.
Ca!e-)y-Ca!e A!!e!!&ent! 2nder&ine )ene it! ro& Privilege

CASE-)$-CASE )ALANCIN" "2TS NECESSA#$ CE#TAINT$ OF P#I%ILE"E David A. Nel!on' La4 St1dent - Nort(4e!tern' ://*' !Attorney"Client Privilege and Proced,ral Sa$eg,ard%' Are T)ey Wort) t)e Co%t%F!D .& N2. @. #. (ev 6&.D p. 614 T)e attorney"client privilege play% a vital role in o,r C,%tice %y%te-. In order to play it% roleD t)e protection o$ t)e privilege -,%t be clearly de$ined and t)e $,ll %cope o$ t)at protection -,%t apply in all ca%e%. I$ t)e e7i%tence o$ t)e privilege depend% ,pon balancing t)e intere%t% in every individ,al ca%eD t)en no client can rely ,pon t)at protection. Con%e+,entlyD t)e $ree and open co--,nication t)at t)e privilege i% %,ppo%ed to $o%ter 2ill not re%,lt. Ad)erence to t)e rea%oning o$ t)e Federal Circ,it in t)e%e ca%e% 2o,ld re%,lt in a co-plete abrogation o$
t)e attorney"client privilege.
441
ECception! to Attorney-Client Privilege Sno4.all

E9CEPTIONS TO ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E SNOW)ALL -- S2)>ECT TO A)2SE A,b,rn A. Daily @ S. 8ritta T(orn01i!t' La4 St1dent!-"eorgeto4n 2niver!ity' *++ED !:a% t)e E7ception O,tgro2n t)e PrivilegeF!D 4& =eo. 9. #egal Et)ic% .6D p. 15"4
In t)eoryD t)e cri-e"$ra,d e7ception act% a% a protective -ec)ani%- to prevent t)e e7i%tence o$ t)e attorney"client privilege $roacting a% a %)ield precl,ding di%clo%,re o$ an ongoing or $,t,re cri-e or $ra,d. In $actD t)ere are -any advocate% 2)o $avor $,rt)er broadening o$ t)e e7ception. Nevert)ele%%D in)erent in a -ec)ani%- 2)ic) allo2% a 2ay to circ,-vent
t)e attorney"client privilegeD a privilege 2)ic) protect% in$or-ation t)at oppo%ing partie% 2o,ld ,ndo,btedly $ind very ,%e$,lD i% t)e potential $or ab,%e o$ t)at -ec)ani%- $or p,rpo%e% o,t%ide it% original intent. T)e broadening o$ t)e e7ception t)at )a% occ,rred 2it) >olinD and in %tate co,rt% acro%% t)e co,ntryD i% a $,rt)er invitation to %,c) ab,%eD and )a% ca,%ed one critic to %,gge%t t)at t)e attorney"client privilege !doe% not beco-e viable ,ntil t)e e7ception i% di%proved.!
4;5
ECception! to Attorney-Client Privilege 2nder&ine E ectivene!!

CE#TAINT$ C#ITICAL TO EFFECTI%E P#I%ILE"E 8an3i- T(an5i' ?1een! Co1n!el' *+::' T)e #a2 o$ PrivilegeD Second EditionD p. 44"; T)e need $or cando,r re+,ire% a )ig) degree o$ certainty on t)e part o$ t)o%e involved in t)e relevant la2yer"client dialog,e. A% t)e @S S,pre-e Co,rt )a% p,t itD an ,ncertain privilege i% little better t)an no privilege at all. Con$idence in non"di%clo%,re i% e%%ential i$ t)e privilege i% to ac)ieve it% rai%on d<etre . A la2yer -,%t be
able to give )i% client an ab%ol,te and ,n+,ali$ied a%%,rance t)at 2)atever t)e client tell% )i- in con$idence 2ill never be di%clo%ed 2it)o,t )i% con%ent Act,al or appre)ended litigation i% e-p)atically not t)e to,c)%tone o$ t)e ,nderlying rationale in t)i% conte7t. A% #ord Si-on %aid in $ v N)P##' !...t)e adver%ary %y%te-D involving pro$e%%ional a%%i%tanceD co,ld )ardly begin to 2or3 e$$ectively ,nle%% t)e client co,ld be %,re t)at )i% con$idence% 2o,ld be re%pected . And a legal repre%entative 2it) only partial 3no2ledge o$ )i% ca%e 2o,ld be li3e a c)a-pion going into battle ,ncon%cio,% o$ a gap in )i% ar-o,r. 8,t it i% only t)e rare ca%e 2)ic) )a% to be $o,g)t o,t in co,rt. /any potential di%p,te%D civil e%peciallyD are obviated or %ettled on advice in t)e lig)t o$ t)e li3ely o,tco-e i$ t)ey )ad to be $o,g)t o,t in co,rt. T)i% i% very -,c) in t)e intere%t o$ %ocietyD %ince a la2%,itD t)o,g) a pre$erable 2ay o$ %ettling a di%p,te to act,al or t)reatened violenceD i% 2a%te$,l o$ ),-an and -aterial re%o,rce%. T),% %i-ilar con%ideration% apply 2)enever a citiBen %ee3% pro$e%%ional g,idance $ro- a legal advi%er""2)et)er 2it) a vie2 to ,nderta3ing or avoiding litigationD 2)et)er in arranging )i% a$$air% in or o,t o$ co,rt.!
4;4
DrDFPatient Con identiality Spillover, Lin5 - #ationale t(e Sa&e

CAN=T DISTIN"2IS- A#"23ENTS IN FA%O# OF PATIENT CONFIDENTIALIT$ F#O3 A CLIENTS Nancy 9. 3oore' La4 Pro e!!or-#1tger!' :/;<F:/;GD !#i-it% to Attorney"Client Con$identiality' A <P)ilo%op)ically In$or-ed< And Co-parative Approac) to #egal and /edical Et)ic%D! 6& Ca%e. W. (e%. 4**D p. 41*". T)ere i% no apparent rea%on to di%ting,i%) la2yer% $ro- doctor% at t)e $ir%t %tage o$ analy%i% "" t)e initial C,%ti$ication $or t)e obligation o$ con$identiality. @%ing eit)er a ,tilitarian or a deontological approac)D it %)o,ld be obvio,% t)at la2yer% )aveD a% do p)y%ician%D at lea%t a pri-a $acie obligation to -aintain client con$identiality. Wit)o,t %,c) an obligationD client% -ig)t be deterred $ro- t)e $,ll di%clo%,re nece%%ary $or e$$ective legal repre%entation. /oreoverD t)e %,bCect -atter o$ la2yer"client co--,nication% Gand ot)er in$or-ationH i% C,%t a% private a% t)o%e involved in t)e p)y%ician"patient relation%)ip . 8eca,%e t)e very nat,re o$ a
pri-a $acie obligation i% t)at it i% not ab%ol,teD b,t -ay give 2ay in lig)t o$ ot)er %,b%tantial intere%t%D t)e recognition o$ %,c) an obligation in t)e la2yer"client relation%)ip %)o,ld be ,ncontrover%ial.
4;;
CP - Federali7e Privilege, Solve! 2ncertainty

CON"#ESS S-O2LD ACT TO C#EATE FEDE#AL ATTO#NE$-CLIENT P#I%ILE"E STANDA#D-- WILL SOL%E P#O)LE3S OF 2NCE#TAINT$ T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. &6"4 T)e ti-e )a% co-e $or a -ore radical %ol,tion. A +,arter cent,ry a$ter t)e la%t %erio,% congre%%ional con%ideration o$D and ,lti-ate inaction onD t)e attorney"client privilegeD t)i% area o$ t)e la2 i% no2 in %erio,% need o$ rene2ed congre%%ional attention. Jet en)ancing certainty de-and% -ore t)an c)ange% in c)oice"o$"la2 principle% or t)e codi$ication o$ a %et o$ privilege r,le% $or t)e $ederal co,rt%. (at)erD to re%olve bot) lingering con$lict% bet2een C,ri%diction% and con$,%ion 2it)in C,ri%diction%D 2e need a %ingleD codi$ied %ol,tion. Congre%%D t)ere$oreD %)o,ld $ederaliBe t)e la2 o$ privilege pree-ptivelyD creating ,ni$or- protection $or client con$idence% t)at 2ill apply in every proceeding in $ederal and %tate co,rtD a% 2ell a% in arbitration proceeding%D ad-ini%trative )earing%D and legi%lative proceeding%. Federal privilege legi%lation providing clearD ,n+,ali$iedD and generally applicable privilege protection% 2ill prod,ce a level o$ certainty %,$$icient to reap t)e potential bene$it% o$ t)e privilege 2)ile ,lti-ately lo2ering it% tran%action co%t%. Congre%% )a% bot) t)e capacity and t)e con%tit,tional po2er to enact t)i% needed re$orCON"#ESS S-O2LD FEDE#ALIBE P#I%ILE"E T)o-a% P. "lynn' La4 Pro e!!or' Seton -all' *++*' !FederaliBing Privilege!D ; A-. @.#. (ev. 1D p. 46;"4 T)e only 2ay to ac)ieve rea%onable certainty in privilege la2 i% to enact $ederal legi%lation providing clearD national protection% $or attorney"client co--,nication% t)at 2ill apply regardle%% o$ t)e $ort,ity o$ t)e $or,- " %tateD $ederalD or nonC,dicial " in 2)ic) t)e privilege i% a%%erted. Only a codi$iedD pree-ptiveD and ,n+,ali$ied $ederal privilege can re%olve c,rrent privilege 2oe%. Per)ap% contrary to prevailing t)o,g)tD Congre%% i% t)e -o%t appropriate policy"-a3ing body to addre%% t)e e7i%ting proble-% 2it) privilege doctrine. Fir%tD t)e co--on"la2 -et)od )a% $ailed to develop predictable privilege protection%. SecondD ,nder t)e (,le% Enabling ActD only Congre%% can codi$y $ederal privilege protection%I
)enceD even t)e -ore li-ited propo%ed re$or-% " %,c) a% codi$ying a %et o$ privilege r,le% $or $ederal co,rt% " 2o,ld re+,ire congre%%ional action. Alt)o,g) enacting %,$$iciently detailed legi%lation 2o,ld re+,ire Congre%% to re%olve a n,-ber o$ di$$ic,ltD lingering i%%,e%D t)e%e i%%,e% de%erve vigoro,% debate and re%ol,tion . Congre%% i% no2 2ell"e+,ipped $or %,c) policy -a3ing' it )a% $ar -ore co--entaryD )i%toryD and e7perience to dra2 ,pon t)an it did a +,arter cent,ry agoD a% 2ell a% e%tabli%)ed ve)icle% $or receiving C,dicialD %c)olarlyD and ot)er inp,t. /oreoverD alt)o,g) privilege protection% o$ten are -i%c)aracteriBed a% proced,ral or evidentiary !r,le%D! t)ey e-body %,b%tantive protection% or rig)t% pro-oting e7tra"C,dicial intere%t% . T),%D Congre%% " 2)ic) already )a% recogniBed t)e %,b%tantive nat,re o$ privilege protection% " )a% t)e po2er ,nder t)e Co--erce Cla,%e to enact
legi%lation g,aranteeing t)e%e protection% in all co,rt% and nonC,dicial $oraD and t)i% e7erci%e o$ po2er doe% not o$$end t)e Tent) A-end-ent.

Attorney Client LD Topic

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Attorney Client LD Topic

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

"Attorney-Client Privilege" Legal De inition!

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Privilege, Legal Protection o Con identiality in Speci ic #elation!(ip!

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Et(ical #e01ire&ent o Attorney Con identiality Di!tinct ro& Evidentiary Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Attorney-Client Privilege Con lict! 4it( Tr1t(-See5ing

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

AT, "Tr1t( See5ing Fr1!trated )y Ot(er Protection! and Privilege!"

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, %ital or >1!t O1tco&e!

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, De endant=! #ig(t to Evidence O1t4eig(!

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, %ital or 3orality

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, %ital or Societal S1rvival

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, P1.lic Tr1!t in t(e Legal Sy!te&

-A#3 TO T#2T--SEE8IN" 3EANS T-AT P#I%ILE"ES DELE"ITI3IBE T-E LE"AL S$STE3

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, Tr1t( Critical to Adver!ary Sy!te&

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Tr1t( See5ing S(o1ld Tr1&p, Cri&e-Fra1d ECception Con ir&!

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

S(o1ld Eli&inate Attorney-Client Privilege - )etter or >1!tice

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

S(o1ld Weig( Attorney-Client Privilege in Individ1al Ca!e!

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to Con!tit1tional #ig(t!- "enerally

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to E ective De en!e

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to Con!tit1tional #ig(t! - Privacy

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to Adver!ary Sy!te&

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Attorney-Client Privilege Not E!!ential to A1tono&y

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Attorney-Client Privilege Fail!, Incon!i!tently Applied

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege

Planet Debate Attorney Client Privilege