Insights

Analysis from the front lines of IP & technology law.

Our attorneys write about the developments shaping intellectual property — from the PTAB and the Federal Circuit to the practical realities of protecting fast-moving technology.

Showing 853–864 of 1287
LitigationDiscovery

Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product for Businesses: Upjohn, In-House Counsel, and the Common Interest

Privilege is the only evidentiary protection a company can lose through carelessness on an ordinary Tuesday and never get back. This article explains the two distinct doctrines that businesses rely on and constantly conflate: the attorney-client privilege, which protects confidential communications for the purpose of legal advice, and the work product doctrine, which protects materials prepared in anticipation of litigation. It covers who holds the corporate privilege and who may waive it, the control group and subject matter tests resolved by Upjohn v. United States, the special problems of in-house counsel who wear business and legal hats, and the primary purpose and significant purpose tests for dual-purpose communications after In re Kellogg Brown and Root. It works through work product under Rule 26(b)(3), the difference between ordinary and opinion work product, and the substantial need exception. It then addresses waiver in operational terms: Federal Rule of Evidence 502, clawback agreements and Rule 502(d) orders, subject matter waiver, the at-issue and advice-of-counsel waivers, and disclosure to auditors, insurers, and the government. Sections on the crime-fraud exception, the common interest doctrine, internal investigations, and privilege logs follow, with checklists, a worked example, an FAQ, and related reading.

Casey Scott McKayMay 14, 202525 min read