Edward E. Colton and Lillian Kaltman v. United States of America, United States of America v. Edward E. Colton

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• allowing inquiry into the nature of the attorney-client relationship if limited to “general responses, such as litigation, drafting of documents, tax advice, and the like”
• another blanket refusal to respond to IRS summons seeking records concerning named, known clients; good discussion but often loosely cited
• “[T]he privilege extends essentially only to the substance of matters communicated to an attorney in professional confidence.”
• \[T]he privilege extends essentially only to the substance of matters communicated to an attorney in professional confidence.\
• ‘[T]he privilege extends essentially only to the substance of matters communicated to an attorney in professional confidence.’
• attorney- client privilege was waived where the third party, an investment banker, was not acting “as a translator or interpreter of client communications”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).