D.C. Circuit· 6/15/1984

In Re Sealed Case

Citations

737 F.2d 94
237 U.S. App. D.C. 312
1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 21505

How courts have described this case

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

recognizing that “[i]t remains the claimant’s burden, however, to present to the court sufficient facts to establish the privilege.”
holding that attorney-client privilege applied to conversation where the attorney “rendered legal advice [to the Company], based, at least in part, on Company confidential 4 information previously disclosed to him”
explaining that the attorney-client privilege covers relationships between attorneys and an individual who “sought to become a client” (citation omitted)
affording the protection of the attorney-client privilege only if “the communication relates to a fact of which the attorney was informed ... by his client.”
adopting, with modifications, the four-part test summarized by Judge Wyzanski in United States v. United Shoe Machinery Corp., 89 F.Supp. 357, 358-59 (D.Mass.1950)
describing “the main rule” that an order compelling testimony is not immediately appealable (collecting cases)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Robinson, Ginsburg, Palmieri, Southern, York

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

222 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

32 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced 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.