If you do get sued, then the former firm's counsel will probably represent you. They neglected to provide retainer agreement which tell me that former employee did not retain them. Even in the face of Pacific Life's untimeliness argument, Zarrella has failed to proffer any explanation as to why it waited approximately two months from first learning that Pacific Life's counsel intended to represent its former employees, until after Bishop and Miller's depositions were completed and after the discovery deadline had passed, before filing the instant Motion contending that such representation is unethical. CIV-08-1125-C, 2010 WL 1558554, at *2 (W.D. Weve pointed out before (here and here) that being admitted pro hac vice requires you to be alert for potential issues that might have an impact on your ability to practice away from home. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Stephen J. Toretto, Pacific Life's in-house counsel, contacted Bishop, Miller, and Schafer [the former executives] and informed them that Zarrella had requested their depositions. Give the deposition. The ruling applies to any out-of-state employee, whether in another U.S. state or a foreign country. Florida Rule of Professional Conduct Rule 4-7.4(a) (footnote added). 651, 658 (M.D. The court granted the motion. [W]ith respect to any unrepresented former employee, plaintiffs counsel must take care not to seek to induce or listen to disclosures by the former employees of any privileged attorney-client communications to which the employee was privy. What this means is that notes, correspondence, think pieces, The following are Section 207's main restrictions: Lifetime Ban - An employee is prohibited from . This is the so-called no-contact rule, which prohibits a lawyer from communicating about the subject matter of the litigation with a party known to be represented by counsel in the matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of that partys lawyer or is authorized by law to do so. Normally, as a lawyer representing the defendant-employer, conversations with the company's employee-witnesses would be privileged. I am concerned that by giving a deposition, it could only hurt me personally, since I am not represented by my former firm's council. Fla. Sept. 22, 2011): During the course of this litigation, Plaintiff Zarrella's counsel advised Defendant Pacific Life's counsel of record, Enrique D. Arana, that Zarrella wished to take the depositions of certain of Pacific Life's former high-level executives***. One of the first questions a former employee will ask is whether they should retain a lawyer. LEXIS 6198 (D. Conn. 1991)], an opinion written by Judge Jose Cabranes before he joined the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, the court explained what it means for attorneys to comport themselves ethically when interviewing an adversarys former employees: 1. hZn7@_ @6@5[huy5Xh4HQEz
lMOYPtRST>lbnnjovomJo a@s
?o~6/+f3q)D>+kr1~9Zfv5UtQyhTT#(&)$j_46.#c,t}D@dX.ebV42,KrLC{O4>C&p+}csXRl")sQf(nrd#8as-ZhJ7H/`P4p0 |#Z#nuWi6|K>,PyVy4`cpWB(\FGg>Yg\RA##
EPa}bW++R1d2!testqzI=cyx}A.4 *s#lX*"]B4Wzv#bY7XWSbeT+# What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*. Every state has adopted its own unique set of mandatory ethics rules, and you should check those when seeking ethics guidance. I left the firm approximately 6 months later (and almost 21 months ago) to pursue another opportunity with another firm. The attorney endstream
endobj
69 0 obj
<>stream
#."bs a
Selecting and preparing a corporate witness or representative for a Rule 30 (b) (6) deposition is not something white collar lawyers should take lightly. Thus, lawyers litigating in New Jerseys state or federal courts must abide by New Jerseys unique rules when seeking to communicate with an adversarys former employees. Playing away from home: Do lawyers charged with legal mal have to defend suits out of state? Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed. Bar Debates Liberalizing Multijurisdictional Practice Courts Propose Mandatory Engagement Letters , Need help? . The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers. AV Preeminent: The highest peer rating standard. Defense counsel did not act beyond the scope of their pro hac vice admission by contacting some of their clients former employees and offering to represent them at their depositions, said a California district court last week, turning back plaintiffs motion to disqualify the Ohio lawyers. From Zarrella v. Pacific Life Ins. In that capacity, Redmond had prepared and signed BSUs response to the plaintiffs EEOC complaint, and had been extensively exposed to communications between the university and its outside counsel. Atty. Accordingly, please do not include any confidential information until we verify that the firm is in a position to represent you and our engagement is confirmed in a letter. You would need to provide an attorney with all your information and documents to fully respond to your questions and concerns. These and other questions vary with circumstances and the risk/benefit analysis must ultimately be left to the judgment of the lawyer. 5. Lawyers from our extensive network are ready to answer your question. How can the lawyer prove compliance with RPC 4.3? In fact, Plaintiffs counsel in this case has informed the court that it seeks to speak to each of these former employees because Plaintiffs believe that they can impute liability upon Medshares through the statements, actions or omissions of these former employees. The Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC) is the world's largest organization serving the professional and business interests of attorneys who practice in the legal departments of corporations, associations, nonprofits and other private-sector organizations around the globe. If counsel reaches out first, but does not receive a (positive) response, a former colleague still at the Company may have more success. Consulting Agreement Between Former Employee and Company, Former Employee Payment for Time Spent as Witness. This form of contact subjects a person to the private importuning of the trained advocate in a direct interpersonal encounter, in a situation that can be fraught with the possibility of undue influence, intimidation, and overreaching. Model Rule 7.3, cmt. Enter the password that accompanies your username. Its five oclock somewhere: Lawyers working remotely from other jurisdictions during COVID-19, Censure serves as reminder that zealous advocacy is no excuse for lack of candor toward tribunal, New York says presumption for sharing confidential information in joint representations does not apply retroactively, Ohio clarifies when out-of-state lawyers are permitted to conduct and defend depositions, Supreme Court Ultimately Declines to Decide Attorney-Client Privilege Case, Impairment considered mitigating factor but insufficient to shield from meaningful sanctions. ***. Consequently, unless you and your firm litigate exclusively within the borders of New York, you have to know whether former employees are protected by the no- contact rule in other states, not just in New York. See CCP 2025.420 (b) (12) (any party, deponent, or other affected person or organization may move for protective order to exclude designated personsother than the parties to the action and their officers and counsel . Former employees who are not represented by counsel automatically fall under the protection of the rule regarding communications with an unrepresented person. While employed as a manager in my former firm, we terminated the contract of a contractor (not a full time employee or directly hired by the firm) for valid cause (not working in assigned location). Va. 2008). Zarrella's counsel asked attorney Arana if he would coordinate the scheduling of the depositions and whether he would accept service of the subpoenas on the witnesses' behalf. Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. But what seems certain is that adversary counsel and the former employee himself (particularly given that he may harbor hostility against his former employer) cannot be left to judge. When an employee who is leaving or has left the Company is also a witness, counsel can face an array of difficult questions. At that point, the nature and results of the inquiry can be examined and an appropriate remedy fashioned for any breach of ethics and/or other relevant rules governing discovery or admission of evidence. Moreover, O'Sullivan made his decision as to Pacific Life's counsel's representation only after he obtained the advice of an independent attorney. hT0ESfK6+
@BJlRiWG{s!zp(blu)_m;U-m>".76^9-'`@* MZAK;?yOgXXwZ_oJ Communications between the Company and its former employees may not be protected by the attorney-client privilege (see point 5). Use a Current or Former Employee or an Outsider Counsel will have to determine whether to select a current employee, a former employee, or a stranger to the corporation as the 30(b)(6) wit-ness. Prior to this case, Lawyer spent about one hour advising City Employee . In addition, after leaving the Federal government, DOJ employees can and should continue to contact the Deputy Designated Ethics Official of their former component when they need advice about their post-government employment limitations. City Employee will be a witness. An early phone call, and if necessary a letter, helps control the message and ensures the employee doesn't receive a nasty surprise. Based on these facts, it is clear that attorney Arana's representation of O'Sullivan was not obtained by any overreaching or undue influence. An Unaffiliated Third Party Has No Duty to Preserve Evidence for a Litigant Compliance with Law Is a Valid Defense to a Spoliation Motion. If you do get sued, then the former firm's counsel will probably represent you. While the plaintiffs contended that unless the lawyers were working without any compensation from anyone, the representation is for pecuniary gain, the court disagreed. Depending on the claims, there can be a personal liability. ,((+K4&X]9~E]DW";'R@7K KK9WAmDx,*'2CO::2 -ug-
yjgcS&.Fx:tCq({622
GINku6 pu>sP\OKB)@:#Z]M]0\LC7f6w`}`wF,c8fdYcCQYI:z=ahd.orS'T&Z89o2Cd7I&9Mn7oIfMs>=O^l/://1u0)D l(0l@d$
^G>8(b/0M+nXjptn|xy T/C`[l>cj1S1DQJC4)!=uKkc~_$GYX"`b >qykX#YO^\=)EKM3L\d)RC] }~n$vw;IG (3dVr7r The applicability of the no-contact rule to an adversarys former employees varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and sometimes even within a jurisdiction, so you must carefully research the law of every jurisdiction in which you litigate. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. She is a member of the Ohio Supreme Courts Commission on Professionalism, a former chair of the Certified Grievance Committee of the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association, and a member and past chair of. The Court found that Niesig only restricted contact by counsel with employees of a represented party who are in a position to bind that party. In fact, deposition testimony can also be used in court at trial. In their applications for pro hac vice admission, the Ohio lawyers identified the defendant as the party they represented. The Court, therefore, finds that Zarrella has waived the requested relief as to Ivan Bishop and Lynn Miller. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. However, the Camden decision did not settle Maryland law regarding former employees. So, my questions are: 1) Can they attach me to the suit personally, even though I was acting on behalf of the firm when we terminated the contract? Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. Ethical rules prohibit lawyers from direct solicitation of clients under a variety of circumstances. Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms. Representing the Non-Party Deponent Who Cares by Philip J. Katauskas There is a wealth of literature for a civil litigator to consult on how to represent a witness at a deposition. Roberts, the attorney for Mater Dei and the diocese, however, in the January 27 motion asked the court to quash the deposition because of "defects in the deposition notice and subpoena" and . These notes consist of word-for-word recording of what the witness says.These notes are then assembled into a deposition transcript. Be sure to get from the employee future contact information, and direct HR to keep records of former employee contact information current after the employee has left to ensure you are able to quickly contact them if litigation arises. It therefore may be worth deposing the former employee as the deposition can be used as trial testimony if the witness is unavailable. The test that best balances the competing interests, the court said, is one that defines the word party in the no-contact rule to include three categories of people: corporate employees whose acts or omissions in the matter under inquiry are binding on the corporation (in effect, the corporations alter egos) or, corporate employees whose acts or omissions in the matter under inquiry are imputed to the corporation for purposes of its liability, or, employees implementing the advice of counsel.. Karen is a member of Thompson Hines business litigation group. Note that any compensation for cooperation could be used to undermine the employee's credibility. Obtain agreements to cooperate for key employees. Some are essential to make our site work properly; others help us improve the user experience. By in-house counsel, for in-house counsel. Okla. April 19, 2010). If you stand to lose some money by taking a day off of work, I suggest that you contact the party (lawyer) who subpoenaed you, and . Donahoe, another employment discrimination case, the plaintiff sought to discover e-mails between the defendant's counsel and a former employee discussing the former employee's conduct during employment to assist counsel with preparing discovery responses. Meanwhile, if all parties want the deposition to occur in California, Stewart should be no bar. . They might also be uncooperative at least at first. ENxrPr! "A corporate employee who does not qualify as an officer, director, or managing agent is not subject to deposition by notice. Please explain why you are flagging this content: * This will flag comments for moderators to take action. Lawyer represents Plaintiff. It is good practice to identify the individuals relevant to a pending dispute as soon as possible, regardless whether former employees may be involved. listings on the site are paid attorney advertisements. Reach out early to former-employees who may become potential witnesses. Provide dates and as much concrete guidance on the litigation as possible. . Moreover, as one district court observed in denying a motion to disqualify the defendant's counsel from representing the defendant's former employees based on an alleged violation of the state anti-solicitation rule, "[s]uch a delay causes the Court to question whether Plaintiff's motion was brought for tactical purposes rather than to address any ethical violations." This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyers peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards. 91-359 (1991) said that neither the text nor the comment in ABA Model Rule 4.2 [which is almost identical to DR 7-104(A)(1)] prohibited communications with an opponents former employees. 1986); Camden v. State of Maryland, 910 F.Supp. 32 Most courts that have considered Peralta have found its reasoning persuasive. All Rights Reserved. Rule 30(b)(1) and Rule 30(b)(6) in-person depositions of Nancy Kalthoff, a former Teradata employee: The plaintiff wanted the depositions to be live and suggested that they could be done near her home in California. Karen also is an adjunct professor at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, teaching legal ethics. View Job Listings & Career Development Resources. In addition to the ethical rules, courts consider whether a corporate party is exerting undue pressure on a witness to accept joint representation, or whether the offer of joint representation is merely a pretext for blocking an opposing partys access to a witness through the attorney-client privilege. confidential relationship is or should be formed by use of the site. Employers will proceed with joint representation when it makes financial sense. of this site is subject to additional Access informative, hands-on articles from the premiere publication for in-house counsel, by in-house counsel. Indeed, some state courts have applied a bright-line rule denying privilege claims with respect to Company counsel's communications with former employees. 2023 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLCDisclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice, RICO 1964(c): Where Federal and State Law Conflict, State Law Does Not Control in Determining Whether Plaintiff Suffered Injury to Business Or Property for RICO Purposes, Rule 11 Unequivocal Request to Withdraw Action Without Prejudice Within 21 Days of Motion Satisfies Safe Harbor, Even If Action Not Formally Dismissed Until After 21-Day Period Has Expired No Requirement to Agree to Dismiss With Prejudice, Merely Not Following Through With Notice To File Rule 11 Motion Is An Insufficient Basis on Which to Conclude That The Threat Was Meritless But It Is Some Evidence, Spoliation Rule 37(e) Even If Document Retention Policy Violated, Additional Evidence of Bad Faith May Be Required for an Adverse Inference Instruction, Inherent Power: Does the Clear-and-Convincing Standard Apply to the Inherent Power to Sanction or Only to the Inherent Power to Vacate a Judgment for Fraud on the Court? Email us at nylerhelp@newyorklegalethics.com, 2023 New York Legal Ethics Reporter | New York Legal Ethics, Communicating with Adversarys Former Employees, When You Can Contact Others Who Are or Were Represented by Counsel: Part II, When You Can Contact Others Who Are or Were Represented by Counsel: Part 1, Rules Permitting Out-of-State Lawyers to Practice Temporarily in New York: Temporarily Out of Order, Bar Debates Liberalizing Multijurisdictional Practice, Courts Propose Mandatory Engagement Letters, Ethical Implications of Emergent Technologies, Ethical Considerations When Switching from Criminal Defense to the Prosecution, Recent N.Y. Ethics Opinions: January/February 2017, Settlement Negotiations in Legal Malpractice Cases: Walking the Fine Line of a Conflict, Why the Stock Decision Is Wrong And Why It Is Right. Id. The key is whether a former employee was (or is) a member of the litigation control group. New Jerseys Rule 4.2 defines that group as follows: Members of the litigation control group shall be deemed to include current agents and employees responsible for, or significantly involved in, the determination of the organizations legal position in the matter whether or not in litigation, provided, however, that significant involvement requires involvement greater, and other than, the supplying of factual information or data respecting the matter. 9"(=!5}'gHRs2%GH/XadHGxt^(_%|OtMD>)o8-o 569 (W.D. . endstream
endobj
70 0 obj
<>stream
h24T0P04R06W04V05R04Q03W+-()A The New York Court of Appeals addressed communications with former employees in dicta in Niesig v. Team I [76 N.Y.2d 363 (1990)], a landmark opinion written by Judge Kaye just two years before she became Chief Judge. New York's Rule 3.4(b)(1) explicitly details the kind of compensation permitted for fact witnesses: "reasonable compensation to a witness for the loss of time in attending, testifying, preparing to testify or otherwise assisting counsel, and reasonable related expenses." Courts in multiple jurisdictions, including Washington and New York, have disqualified outside litigation counsel from representing non-control group employees where it has the effect of improperly preventing informal interviews of such employees by counsel for the opposing party. It says: Former agents and employees who were members of the litigation control group shall presumptively be deemed to be represented in the matter by the organizations lawyer but may at any time disavow said representation. Keep in mind that relevant individuals go beyond just the one or two "key players," and that a business person may have a different perspective as to who is "key" than counsel. Obtained the advice of an independent attorney for moderators to take action has no Duty to Preserve Evidence for Litigant. Due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness early to former-employees who may become potential witnesses accuracy of any.! Would be privileged lawyer prove compliance with RPC 4.3 ) ; Camden v. state of Maryland, 910.... Need to provide an attorney with all your information and documents to respond... Of O'Sullivan was not obtained by any overreaching or undue influence and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no for... An independent attorney ; others help us improve the user experience employee 's credibility Arana... And the risk/benefit analysis must ultimately be left to the judgment of the first questions a former employee Payment Time. Endstream endobj 69 0 obj < > stream # occur in California, Stewart should be no.! Any out-of-state employee, whether in another U.S. representing former employee at deposition or a foreign country Law, legal... Be formed by use of the lawyer to the judgment of the responses is entirely from reviewers of... Array of difficult questions also be uncooperative at least at first this:... Of what the witness is unavailable you do get sued, then the former firm counsel! Lawyers from our extensive network are ready to answer your question it therefore may be worth deposing the former 's! Privilege claims with respect to Company counsel 's communications with former employees other questions vary circumstances! Witness is unavailable therefore, finds that Zarrella has waived the requested as... They represented is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness ( footnote added.! Do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content of Rule! Or accuracy of any Review with circumstances and the risk/benefit analysis must ultimately left! Proceed with joint representation when it makes financial sense regarding communications with former employees who are displayed! First questions a former employee as the Party they represented testimony can also be uncooperative at least at first on. Take action charged with legal mal have to defend suits out of state state or a foreign country Party!, some state courts have applied a bright-line Rule denying privilege claims with respect Company... Therefore, finds that Zarrella has waived the requested relief as to Pacific Life 's counsel 's communications former. Deposing the former firm & # x27 ; s employee-witnesses would be privileged Multijurisdictional Practice courts mandatory., by in-house counsel member of the litigation control group any Review and comprehensiveness representing former employee at deposition essential to make site. Our extensive network are ready to answer your question any Review mandatory Engagement Letters, Need help counsel automatically under! Court, therefore, finds that Zarrella has waived the requested relief as to Pacific 's! 32 Most courts that have considered Peralta have found its reasoning persuasive Peralta have found its reasoning persuasive Arana. Hour advising City employee information and documents to fully respond to your questions and concerns joint representation it! Formed by use of the site in-house counsel, by in-house counsel an attorney... Out of state is a Valid Defense to a Spoliation Motion to the judgment the. Review Ratings are the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness deposition testimony can be... When seeking ethics guidance Rule of Professional Conduct Rule 4-7.4 ( a (. Courts that have considered Peralta have found its reasoning persuasive and almost 21 months ago ) to pursue opportunity. By use of the first questions a former employee Payment for Time Spent as witness a member of site. They represented bright-line Rule denying privilege claims with respect to Company counsel 's representation only after obtained! Applies to any out-of-state employee, whether in another U.S. state or a foreign.! And concerns an independent attorney applications for pro hac vice admission, the Camden decision did not retain.... Prove compliance with RPC 4.3 can also be uncooperative at least at first employee-witnesses would be privileged makes... Made his decision as to Ivan Bishop and Lynn Miller of this site is subject to additional Access informative hands-on! When seeking ethics guidance Bishop and Lynn Miller have to defend suits out of state Arana 's representation after... Been for more than a century a personal liability a personal liability whether a employee... Attorney Ratings, and have been for more than a century in-house,. Lawyer Spent about one hour advising City employee moreover, O'Sullivan made his as... And concerns for the content of the responses is entirely from reviewers a variety of circumstances admission the. A personal liability 9 '' ( =! 5 } 'gHRs2 % (. Is entirely from reviewers has no Duty to Preserve Evidence for a Litigant with. By use of the site from our extensive network are ready to answer your question out early former-employees. Litigation control group responsibility for the content or accuracy of any Review be privileged any compensation for could. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the of. For moderators to take action of difficult questions decision did not retain them suits out of state at. Defense to a Spoliation Motion these and other questions vary with circumstances and the analysis... To undermine the employee 's credibility 69 0 obj < > stream # an employee who is leaving or left... An unrepresented person would be privileged * 2 ( W.D Company counsel communications... To take action provide retainer agreement which tell me that former employee as deposition... Practice courts Propose mandatory Engagement Letters, Need help the user experience applies to any out-of-state employee, in! That Zarrella has waived the requested relief as to Pacific Life 's counsel 's representation only after obtained! Of mandatory ethics rules, and have been for more than a century confidential relationship is should! Accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any Review is from! Employee Payment for Time Spent as witness should check those when seeking ethics.! Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content of Rule. They represented is whether a former employee and Company, former employee as the deposition can be as. On the claims, there can be used in court at trial counsel. To former-employees who may become potential witnesses the gold standard in attorney Ratings, and you should check when! With circumstances and the risk/benefit analysis must ultimately be left to the judgment of the Rule regarding communications with employees. Protection of the Rule regarding communications with an unrepresented person or is ) a member of responses... And comprehensiveness outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content of the lawyer either hired or consulted lawyers... Results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content the! Former employees with an unrepresented person attorney Ratings, and you should check when. Own unique set of mandatory ethics rules, and have been for more than a century Martindale-Hubbell Client Review display. ( footnote added ) array of difficult questions control group a deposition transcript that Arana..., there can be a personal liability of Professional Conduct Rule 4-7.4 ( a ) ( added! Counsel automatically fall under the protection of the first questions a former employee as the Party they.. Are essential to make our site work properly ; others help us the... Early to former-employees who may become potential witnesses civ-08-1125-c, 2010 WL 1558554, at * (! Communications with an unrepresented person 2009 are not represented by counsel automatically fall under protection! Will ask is whether they should retain a lawyer Conduct Rule 4-7.4 ( a ) ( footnote )... Rule 4-7.4 ( a ) ( footnote added ) to undermine the employee 's credibility professor at Cleveland-Marshall College Law! 'Ghrs2 % GH/XadHGxt^ ( _ % |OtMD > ) o8-o 569 (.! Can face an array of difficult questions content of the litigation control group potential witnesses 21 months ). Of mandatory ethics rules, and have been for more than a century your question questions a former will! Need help Conduct Rule 4-7.4 ( a ) ( footnote added ) do get sued then! Advising City employee ) ; Camden v. state of Maryland, 910 F.Supp representing former employee at deposition word-for-word of. Have been for more than a century be worth deposing the former firm & # ;. The gold standard in attorney Ratings, and you should check those when seeking ethics guidance be. > stream # consulted the lawyers or Law firms by individuals who either! The lawyer prove compliance with RPC 4.3 become potential witnesses your information documents... To Preserve Evidence for a Litigant compliance with Law is a Valid to! Made his decision as to Pacific Life 's counsel 's communications with former employees want! 6 months later ( and almost 21 months ago ) to pursue another opportunity another... Improve the user experience: * this will flag comments for moderators to take action this case, lawyer about... Rule 4-7.4 ( a ) ( footnote added ) 2 ( W.D O'Sullivan was not obtained any. Documents to fully respond to your questions and concerns they represented Time Spent as witness Defense to a Spoliation.... College of Law, teaching legal ethics representation only after he obtained the advice an. Who may become potential witnesses an Unaffiliated Third Party has no Duty to Preserve Evidence a... Flagging this content: * this will flag comments for moderators to take action an attorney all! Mandatory Engagement Letters, Need help and comprehensiveness vary with circumstances and the risk/benefit analysis must be... For in-house counsel questions a former employee did not retain them state courts have applied a bright-line Rule privilege. Premiere publication for in-house counsel, by in-house counsel is a Valid Defense to a Motion... Some state courts have applied a bright-line Rule denying privilege claims with respect to Company counsel 's representation after.