Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Plaintiffs sue hertz the guy himself is from out of

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: the client but this court doesn't care. Different versions of the way joint defense/common interest is work: Uniform rules and Texas rules use the phrase: "In a pending action" Seems to imply that something has to have been filed, but doesn't have to be that strictly construed...in Schwimmer these communications were made before any indictment.... o Suggests that this document of extra protection requires that there be litigation anticipated at least! o What about communications like this made at the planning stage at some business activity? Should that be protected? Language of Texas rule points to NO! In a pending action, if there is no litigation on a horizon then it looks like it's not privileged...but there's at least one Texas case that decided otherwise! CLARK v. STATE [Lawyer-Client Privilege: Eavesdroppers] Facts: Issue: D charged with murdering his wife the night she secured a divorce. Telephone operator testified that she received a call from Clark, who asked her to put him through to his lawyer, Jimmy Martin, in Da...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online