· 2/27/1990
Austin v. Alfred
Citations
- 788 P.2d 130
- 163 Ariz. 397
- 55 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 67
- 1990 Ariz. App. LEXIS 55
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that it \would be incongruous to allow a party\ to use the attorney-client privilege as a strategic tool to \deny access of the opposing party to relevant information\
- stating that Rule 11.4(b) implicitly allows a defendant to redact his statements from a mental health expert’s report
- stating that it “would be incongruous to allow a party” to use the attorney-client privilege as a strategic tool to “deny access of the opposing party to relevant information”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Roll, Hathaway, Howard
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.