Sending the privilege away: attorney-client emails in the corporate setting
In a pending False Claims Act case involving allegations of noncompliance with the federal physician self-referral law, 42 U.S.C. § 1395nn, the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida has issued a recent order denying the protection of attorney-client privilege. Without an in-depth analysis of the work-product doctrine, the Court found that no attorney-client or work product protection existed over emails involving in-house counsel and the finance department, emails where an in-house attorney was only copied, or communications that did not exclusively seek legal advice.
Click on the link above to download this K&L Gates briefing.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from The Lawyer
Analysis from The Lawyer
K&L Gates’ move to London’s One New Change development was key to a wider inclusive strategy