ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Ethics Blogs -> Legal Ethics Forum

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Ethics

: Legal Ethics Forum

Reporting a corporate investigation to a Board with adverse interests can destroy the privilege.

ADVERTISEMENTS

In an article titled, "Delaware Ruling May Let Plaintiffs Pierce Backdating Probes," American Lawyer Media covers an important case about loss of attorney client privilege. The key graf:

The Delaware court ruled Nov. 30 that the special committee investigating backdating at Maxim can't shield its final report and its communications with lawyers at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe. One reason: The committee shared the results of the investigation with Maxim's board of directors, a third party with adverse interests.

Full post as published by Legal Ethics Forum on December 27, 2007 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.016 secs (new cache)