“Under the crime-fraud exception, communications are not privileged when the client consults an attorney for advice that will serve him in the commission of a fraud or crime.” In re Grand Jury Investigation, 810 F.3d 1110, 1113 (9th Cir. 2016) (citations omitted). To meet this burden, Durham had to show two things: 1) That the client was engaged in or planning a criminal or fraudulent scheme when it sought the advice of counsel to further the scheme. 2) That Durham demonstrated the attorney-client communications for which production is sought are sufficiently related to and were made in furtherance of the intended, or present, continuing illegality.
tl;dr: There is no client-attorney privilege if you're using it to commit fraud.
Wrapping up an early phase. Still a long way to go. But the movie gets better from here.
If you've ever read The Odyssey, it wasn't until the very end when Odysseus slayed all the suitors who tried to move in on his wife and kingdom. This is similar, but satisfaction will start much sooner than the final act.
Then there's this:
tl;dr: There is no client-attorney privilege if you're using it to commit fraud.
Boom.
Wrapping up an early phase. Still a long way to go. But the movie gets better from here.
If you've ever read The Odyssey, it wasn't until the very end when Odysseus slayed all the suitors who tried to move in on his wife and kingdom. This is similar, but satisfaction will start much sooner than the final act.
We have the best classics pedes… my eldest kid is studying this in college now and is teaching my youngest about it
They’ve broken Marc Elias/hildabeest attorney client privilege 😳 Sod popcorn 🍿 I’m gonna need some sammiches for this….