My response:
You, as the client, are the "Holder of the Privilege". As such, you can waive your privilege rights at any time you please. You can tell the world about your case, and any matters concerning your case.
On the other side of the coin, the attorney is barred from discussing your case with any "third, disinterested, parties". For example, if you have a medical condition that must be discussed with your attorney, the attorney cannot (without your prior approval) discuss this "condition" with anyone "outside of the lawsuit".
Every communication between an attorney and client, or potential client, is presumed to have been made in confidence and the party opposing the privilege has the burden of proving the communication was not intended to be confidential. [Ev C §917] The court will determine as a preliminary fact whether the dominant purpose of the communication was to transmit the information within the attorney-client relationship. [See Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Superior Court (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 467, 200 Cal.Rptr. 471.]
The attorney-client privilege may be claimed by:
(1). The holder of the privilege, defined by Ev C §953 as the client or the client’s personal representative;
(2). A holder by "proxy" of the client; and
(3). The lawyer, unless there is no longer a holder in existence or the lawyer is instructed by an authorized person to divulge the information [Ev C §954].
The attorney-client privilege may not be invoked as to:
(1). Services sought to assist in a fraud or crime [Ev C §956; see also BP Alaska Exploration, Inc. v. Superior Court (1988) 199 Cal.App.3d 1240, 245 Cal.Rptr 682];
(2). Privileged communications where the lawyer reasonably believes the disclosure is necessary to prevent a criminal act likely to cause death or bodily harm [Ev C §956.5];
(3). Communications between a lawyer and a deceased client relevant to a dispute among parties claiming an interest in the deceased client’s estate [Ev C §957];
(4). Issues concerning a breach by either the attorney or the client of their relationship [Ev C §958]; and
(5). Disputes among parties who consulted the same attorney about a matter of common interest [Ev C §962; see also Wortham & Van Liew v. Superior Court (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 927, 233 Cal.Rptr 725].
IAAL
[Edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE on 04-19-2001 at 03:46 PM]
