Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 21 OCTOBER 2015

Court Analyzes Possible Privilege Protection For Communications With Public Relations Consultants

Corporations and their lawyers frequently work with public relations consultants when facing ongoing or anticipated litigation.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Corporations and their lawyers frequently work with public relations consultants when facing ongoing or anticipated litigation. In the work product context, courts agree that disclosing preexisting work product to such consultants does not waive that robust protection, but disagree about whether the consultants can themselves create protected work product.

The analysis in the attorney-client privilege context involves even more judicial disagreements. In Grand Canyon Skywalk Development LLC v. Cieslak, the District of Nevada extensively dealt with this issue, starting with an understatement: "Courts are divided on whether the attorney-client privilege extends to communications between a client's counsel and the public relations consultant that the client or its counsel hires to assist in ongoing or anticipated legal matters or disputes." Case Nos. 2:15-cv-01189- & 2:13-cv-00596-JAD-GWF, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107457, at *22 (D. Nev. Aug. 13, 2015). The

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from