Page 1 of 13

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 9, No. 10

Publication Date: October 25, 2022

DOI:10.14738/assrj.910.13320. Hunter, R. J., & Shannon, J. H. (2022). Assessing Confidentiality in the Lawyer-Client Relationship: A Client Perspective. Advances in

Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(10). 418-430.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Assessing Confidentiality in the Lawyer-Client Relationship: A

Client Perspective

Richard J. Hunter

Professor of Legal Studies, Seton Hall University

Adjunct Professor of Law, University of Tulsa College of Law

John H. Shannon

Professor of Legal Studies, Seton Hall University

ABSTRACT

This article will provide information on issues relating to the attorney-client

relationship and the attorney-client privilege, the duty of confidentiality, the crime- fraud exception, the work product doctrine, and other exceptions to the general

duty of confidentiality existing in the lawyer-client relationship. The article is based

on an analysis of decisional cases and selected commentaries found in law reviews

and writings of prominent legal practioners.

Key words: Confidentiality; attorney-client privilege; work product; crime-fraud

exception

OVERVIEW

Young (2022) sets the stage for the discussion of issues relating to the attorney-client

relationship and states:

“Attorney/client privilege defines the confidential relationship between a client, or

prospective client, and his or her lawyer. It’s deeply rooted in the concept of trust

and the idea that a client confronting a legal issue should be able to fully and

completely trust the lawyer whose advice they are seeking. Attorney/client

privilege means that whatever you share privately with your lawyer for the

purpose of seeking legal advice, you share in confidence. But it’s also an

agreement upon which the entire United States legal system is premised. For your

lawyer, it means they are legally prohibited from disclosing or discussing any of

your private communications with others without your permission. And for the

client, it means you should feel comfortable sharing all of the details with your

lawyer so that your lawyer can give you the best advice.”

Monforton (2022) notes that “Lawyers have a duty to keep everything a client tells them

confidential. This is an ethical and legal duty of the lawyer. The courts also respect the

confidential nature of the lawyer-client relationship during a trial. Neither the client nor the

lawyer will be asked to divulge in court what they have discussed.” The principle of

confidentiality is generally expressed as the attorney-client privilege (see Fischel, 1998; Batts,

2020).

Page 2 of 13

419

Hunter, R. J., & Shannon, J. H. (2022). Assessing Confidentiality in the Lawyer-Client Relationship: A Client Perspective. Advances in Social Sciences

Research Journal, 9(10). 418-430.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.910.13320

The attorney-client privilege is an evidentiary privilege applied in a court of law that protects

communications between an attorney (or law firm) and the client. The privilege is “owned” or

is held by the client and gives rise to the duty of an attorney to refuse to disclose certain

confidential communications between the client and his or her or its lawyer. Interestingly, the

attorney-client privilege, like the fiduciary duty of confidentiality, has its roots in the common

law and is the product of more than four -hundred years of judicial history” (Batts, 2020, p. 1).

The privilege is not constitutionally based; rather, it is the product of both state and federal

common or case law (see Partington v. Gedan, 1992) and is generally governed by state statute.

The law firm of Smith Gambrell Russel (2022) noted that:

“The attorney-client privilege is the oldest privilege recognized by Anglo-American

jurisprudence. In fact, the principles of the testimonial privilege may be traced all

the way back to the Roman Republic, and its use was firmly established in English

law as early as the reign of Elizabeth I in the 16th century. Grounded in the concept

of honor, the privilege worked to bar any testimony by the attorney against the

client” (citing Epstein, 2001).

In Upjohn v. United States(1981, p. 389), the United States Supreme Court stated: “The attorney- client privilege is deemed fundamental to the proper functioning of our system of justice.”

The policy rationale for the attorney-client privilege is the encouragement of “full and frank

communication between attorneys and their clients. . .[to] thereby promote broader public

interests in the observance of law and administration of justice.” Giesel (2010, p. 110) noted

that “The lawyer seeking to render the best possible representation to the entity client, wishes

to obtain complete and unfettered disclosure by the individuals with whom the lawyer

communicates. The more complete the disclosure, the better counsel the lawyer can give to his

or her client....”

In Upjohn v. United States (1989, p. 389), the court also noted: “The privilege recognizes that

sound legal advice or advocacy serves public ends, and that such advice or advocacy depends

upon the lawyer’s being fully informed by the client.” McDonald (2021, p. 146) points out that:

“The attorney-client privilege is a rule of evidence, not ethics. Its scope is limited to

confidential communications between lawyer and client or the client’s authorized

representative. Moreover, the communication must be ‘made to facilitate the

provision of legal services to the client ... not intended to be disclosed to any third

party other than those to whom the client revealed the information in the process

of obtaining legal services.’”

The privilege of confidentiality is found in the American Bar Association Model Rule 1.6 (Tuoni,

1993), which states:

(a) A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client

unless the client gives informed consent, the disclosure is impliedly authorized in

order to carry out the representation or the disclosure is permitted by paragraph

(b).

Tuoni (1993, p. 459) writes that “Model Rule 1.6 enlarged the protection of client

confidentiality under the ABA Code because it applies to all information about a client ‘relating

to the representation.’” The American Bar Association clarified that Rule 1.6 provides no

Page 3 of 13

420

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 9, Issue 10, October-2022

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

exception for information that is "generally known" or "contained in a public record" (see

McDonald, 2021). The ABA adopted the position that the public filing of a document that

contains confidential information, in nearly all cases, will not convert the information contained

in that document into "generally known" information, and the normal rules of confidentiality

will still apply—although there is a significant minority view found in an opinion by the

Supreme Court of Virginia in Hunter v. Virginia State Bar, 2013).

According to Norton-Rose-Fulbright (2022): “The attorney-client privilege, if found applicable,

is generally absolute, and it applies broadly in the litigation, as well as non-litigation, contexts.”

These may include the wide breadth of civil, criminal, administrative, regulatory and

disciplinary proceedings (see Swidler & Berlin v. United States, 1998, pp. 408-409). Ellis (2017)

has noted that “The privilege applies to legal advice communicated to the client, or confidential

information communicated to the attorney by the client, even if litigation is not threatened.”

Since the attorney-client privilege is held by the client, the client has the sole authority to waive

the privilege (Olmos v. Giles, PC, 2022). However, an attorney is required to assert or invoke the

privilege whenever necessary on behalf of the client, even without an express instruction by

the client.

There are few exceptions to the privilege, discussed below. If the privilege applies, however,

compelled disclosure by the attorney is forbidden regardless of any asserted need expressed

by a third party (In re Grand Jury Investigation, 1979).

COMPARING THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE TO THE DUTY OF CONFIDENTIALITY

The duty of confidentiality arises out of the generalized fiduciary duty owed by the attorney to

the client, which is generally viewed as loyalty, and trust, and confidentiality.

In the case of Banner v. City of Flint (2004, pp. 19-20), the United States Court of Appeals for the

Sixth Circuit, in citing Hazard, Hodes, and Jarvis (2001), wrote:

“To encourage candor in an attorney-client relationship, a lawyer must maintain

confidentiality of information relating to the representation. The ethical rule

of confidentiality is closely related to the evidentiary rule of attorney-client

privilege. The difference is that confidentiality applies to virtually all information

coming into a lawyer’s hands concerning a client, and forbids virtually all

disclosures. The privilege is narrow in scope, invoked in response to an attempt to

compel testimony, where the testimony sought is about information passed

between lawyer and client. The duty of confidentiality directs lawyers not to

disclose, voluntarily or otherwise, unless an exception applies, information that

the lawyer has learned about a client, no matter where or how the information was

learned.”

Similar to the attorney-client privilege, the duty of confidentiality serves the purpose of

contributing to the existence of trust that is the bedrock of the attorney-client relationship

whereby the client is able to communicate “fully and frankly” without the threat of “legally

damaging, embarrassing or secret information being shared with others” (Ellis, 2017). As the

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia noted in In re Craig (2017):

“The lawyer’s duty of confidentiality fosters full and open communication between client and