In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Served Upon Gerald L. Shargel, Esq. John Doe, Intervenor-Appellant v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “there may be circumstances under which the identification of a client may amount to prejudicial disclosure of a confidential communication”
• holding that the attorney-client privilege does not protect client-identifying information simply because the information could prejudice the client
• explaining that communications revealing only “fee information stand on a footing different from communications intended by the client to explain a problem to a lawyer in order to obtain legal advice”
• government entitled to fee information from former attorneys pursuant to its investigation of continuing criminal enterprises
• “The attorney-client privilege typically does not extend, however, to the identity of the client(s) or the fee arrangements that the client(s
• privilege does not protect identity of \benefactor\ paying legal fees of another

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).