Court of Appeals of Maryland· 12/13/2004

Newman v. State

Citations

863 A.2d 321
384 Md. 285
2004 Md. LEXIS 787

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that the attorney-client privilege was not defeated by the presence of a third party confidant because: (1
concluding that the attorney-client privilege was not defeated by the presence of a third party confidant because: (1) the record indicated the client's \clear understanding that the communications made in the presence of [the third party] would remain confidential\; (2
adopting Rosati approach and finding no waiver of privilege where the client's close personal friend attended counsel meetings because: (1
“[T]he crime-fraud exception applies in Maryland to exempt communications seeking advice or aid in furtherance of a crime or fraud.”
with some exceptions not here relevant, “[flor a communication to be considered privileged, it cannot be intended for disclosure to third parties”
“Until 1776, it was not deemed to be a right of the client but rather was that of the attorney as a point of honor as an element of professional behavior.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bell, Wilner, Cathell, Harrell, Battaglia, Eldridge, Rodowsky

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

49 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.