All communications between an attorney and his or her client, no matter what the content, are privileged.

Only the attorney can waive the attorney/client privilege.

Privileges may cause important evidence to be suppressed.

A client’s identity is generally not protected under the attorney-client privilege.

If the client asks her attorney for help in committing a crime, the attorney must testify regarding this request.

It is unlawful for one spouse to testify against the other.

Many states do not even acknowledge a physician-patient privilege.

Freddy I.N. Sider, who was Chief Financial Officer of a large corporation, telephoned his best friend about the corporation’s next public offering of stock. His attorney happened to be present when he made this call. Freddy’s conduct is considered criminal by the Securities Exchange Commission, so when the SEC got a tip about the insider trading, they subpoenaed Freddy’s attorney to testify before the Federal Grand Jury. The attorney refused to testify. The presiding court should:

After the phone call, I.N. Sider and his attorney went for coffee. At the coffee shop, while the waitress was handing him a menu, I.N. Sider said to the attorney, “I know you heard me give my friend that insider tip.” At the trial, the Securities attorney calls the waitress to testify about the conversation between the attorney and I.N. Sider. Mr. Sider tells his attorney to object on attorney-client privilege. The trial court should:

Mr. Sider was indicted for Securities violations. During his trial preparation with a new attorney, their investigator presented them with some information which they all then discussed. Later in the day, the investigator was asked by a friend to describe the work the investigator was doing in relating to Mr. Sider’s indictment. Does any privilege apply?

Mary confessed to her priest that she had had a sexual relationship with an elected official. The priest was later called to testify at Congressional hearings about what Mary had confessed. The priest refused to testify, and he was threatened with contempt of Congress. The likely result is

Jim admitted to his attorney that the drugs found in his car were his. Later he told his attorney that he intended to testify that the drugs belonged to a friend who had borrowed Jim’s car. The attorney withdrew from the case, and was subsequently called to testify against Jim. When asked about whether his client admitted that the drugs were his, the attorney

A husband and wife were having a confidential conversation, but a snoopy neighbor eavesdropped by putting an amplifying device against the wall, and heard every word. The wife was called to testify against her husband, but she legally refused under the spousal privilege in that state. The eavesdropping neighbor was then called to testify. The husband

Big Company (BC), after eight lawyers carefully scrutinized 3 million pages, then promptly disclosed 2 million pages of disclosure to the Little Company (LC).  Although LC had a small legal team, one of them found what looked like attorney-client work and work-product stuck inside another larger document.  The parties had not made any agreements about waiving privileges.  Within days of the disclosure BC called LC to inform LC to sequester the protected information.  Thereafter, LC filed a motion requesting the court to find that BC had waived both privileges on the subject.  The court should

In California, if a patient goes to the emergency room suffering from a gun shot wound, the doctor treating the patient