Unlike the rules-based work product doctrine, the
attorney-client privilege developed organically in every United
States jurisdiction. However, states have chosen different places
to articulate their privilege protection. States have memorialized
their attorney-client privilege in their common law, in statutory
law, in evidentiary rules, or in a combination of those
sources.
In Garcia v. Progressive Choice Insurance Co., Case No.
11-CV-466-BEN (NLS), 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105932, at
*6-7 (S.D. Cal. July 30, 2012), the court recognized that
"[t]he attorney-client privilege under California law is
outlined in § 954 of the California Evidence Code." In
some states, things are even more complicated. For instance, in
Tennessee, "certain attorney client communications are made
confidential under three different sources of state law: statute,
common law, and rules promulgated by the Tennessee Supreme Court.
Tennessean v. Tenn. Dep't of Pers., No.
M2005-02578-COA-R3-CV,
