Disclosure waives privilege.Communications between taxpayers and attorneys are protected against forced disclosure by the doctrine of attorney-client privilege In the law of evidence, a client's privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent any other person from disclosing, confidential communications between the client and his or her attorney. . The prohibition against forced disclosure has been extended to materials collected or prepared by an attorney in anticipation of litigation An action brought in court to enforce a particular right. The act or process of bringing a lawsuit in and of itself; a judicial contest; any dispute. When a person begins a civil lawsuit, the person enters into a process called litigation. under the so-called work-product doctrine In American civil procedure, the work-product doctrine protects materials prepared in anticipation of litigation from discovery by opposing counsel.[1] It is also known as the work-product rule, the work-product immunity, the work-product privilege (somewhat erroneous . Occasionally, protected documents are disclosed inadvertently. In such cases, the courts must decide if the disclosure waives the right of privilege. One view is that a document's disclosure automatically waives privilege. Another is that inadvertent disclosure win not waive privilege because the disclosure was not sanctioned by the holder of the privilege. A third view exists. In National Helium Corp. v. United States United States, officially United States of America, republic (2005 est. pop. 295,734,000), 3,539,227 sq mi (9,166,598 sq km), North America. The United States is the world's third largest country in population and the fourth largest country in area. (219 Ct. C1. 612, 1979), the court considered whether the taxpayer intended to waive the right of privilege and the precautions taken to prevent disclosure. More recently, in Carter v. Gibbs (909 F.2d 1450, 1990), the Federal Circuit Court appeared to adopt a rule that all disclosures waive privilege but stopped short of overruling o·ver·rule tr.v. o·ver·ruled, o·ver·rul·ing, o·ver·rules 1. a. To disallow the action or arguments of, especially by virtue of higher authority: National Helium. In August 1996, IBM (International Business Machines Corporation, Armonk, NY, www.ibm.com) The world's largest computer company. IBM's product lines include the S/390 mainframes (zSeries), AS/400 midrange business systems (iSeries), RS/6000 workstations and servers (pSeries), Intel-based servers (xSeries) filed a motion for partial summary judgment -- maintaining that -- as a matter of law -- it was entitled to certain foreign tax credits. As part of the litigation, IBM turned over to the Internal Revenue Service a large number of documents as part of the discovery process. Included were four documents covered by attorney-client privilege. In its suit, IBM requested that the documents be returned since it had not intended to waive its right of privilege. The IRS An abbreviation for the Internal Revenue Service, a federal agency charged with the responsibility of administering and enforcing internal revenue laws. refused, on the grounds their disclosure automatically waived the right of privilege. Result: For the IRS. The court applied the test enunciated in National Helium. Although IBM was able to prove it did not intend to waive privilege, it was unable to prove it took sufficient precautions to prevent the inadvertent disclosure. Taxpayers need to review their procedures for preventing disclosure, including those for computer files and programs -- given the IRS's ability to obtain these items. In a footnote, the court said any disclosure should waive privilege and that it expects prior precedent, including National Helium, to be overturned. If this occurs, it is essential that taxpayers guard against accidental disclosure of privileged material. * IBM v. United States, U. S. Court of Federal Claims, 37 Fed. C1. 599; 1997 US. Claims Lexis 33. |
|
||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion