ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGES

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGES"

Transcription

1 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGES A. MICHELLE MAY McCurley, Kinser, McCurley, & Nelson, L.L.P Sherry Lane, Suite 800 Dallas, Texas Tel: (214) Fax: (214) Advanced Juvenile Law Conference Juvenile Law Section, State Bar of Texas Austin, Texas

2 February, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction Attorney-Client Privilege Elements of the Privilege Confidential Communications Special Criminal Privilege Covered by Privilege Application of the Privilege Exceptions and Limitations Crime/fraud exception Breach of duty Joint clients Waiver Offensive Use...11 III. Work-Product Privilege Civil Work-Product Privilege Criminal Work-Product Privilege Scope of the Privilege Exceptions and Limitations...15 IV. Application to Juvenile Law...15

3 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 3 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES FEDERAL CASES Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U. S. 495, 511, 67 S.Ct. 385 (1947)...13 Modern Woodmen of Am. v. Watkins, 132 F.2d 352, 354 (5th Cir. 1942)...9 United States v. Gotti, 771 F.Supp. 535, 545 (E.D.N.Y. 1991)...10 United States v. Nobles, 422 U.S. 225, 238, 95 S.Ct (1975)...13, 14 United States v. Tyler, 745 F.Supp. 423 (W.D.Mich. 1990)...11 STATE CASES Alba v. State, 492 S.W.2d 555 (Tex. Crim. App. 1973)...14 Ballew v. State, 640 S.W.2d 237, (Tex. Crim. App. 1980)...11 Bearden v. Boone, 693 S.W.2d 25, (Tex. App. Amarillo 1985, orig. proceeding)...11 Borden Inc. v. Valdez, 773 S.W.2d 718, (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 1989, orig. proceeding)...10 Brem v. State, 571 S.W.2d 314 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978)...14 Burnett v. State, 642 S.W.2d 765 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982)(en banc)...10, 11

4 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 4 Byrd v. Woodruff, 891 S.W.2d 689 (Tex. App. Dallas 1994, writ dism d)...17 Cameron Co. v. Hinojosa, 760 S.W.2d 742, 746 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 1988, orig. proceeding)...9 Carmona v. State, 941 S.W.2d 949 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) Cathey v. State, 467 S.W.2d 472, (Tex. Crim. App. 1971)... 9 Childress v. Tate, 148 S.W. 843, 844 (Tex. Civ. App. Fort Worth 1912, writ ref d)...9 Clayton v. Canida, 233 S.W.2d 264, 266 (Tex. Civ. App. Texarkana 1949, no writ)...9 Cole v. Gabriel, 822 S.W.2d 296 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 1991, orig proceeding)...11 Coleson v. Bethan, 931 S.W.2d 706 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 1996, no writ)...17 Dewitt and Rearick, Inc. v. Ferguson, 699 S.W.2d 692, 693 (Tex. App. El Paso 1985, orig proceeding)...11 Dillard Dep t Stores, Inc. v. Sanderson, 928 S.W.2d 319, 321 (Tex. App. Beaumont 1996, orig. proceeding)...16 Duval County Ranch Co. v. Alamo Lumber Co., 663 S.W.2d 627, 634 (Tex. App. Amarillo 1983, writ ref d n.r.e.)...10 Enos v. Baker, 751 S.W.2d 946, (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 1988, orig proceeding)9 GAF Corp. v. Caldwell, 839 S.W.2d 149, 151 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 1992, orig

5 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 5 proceeding)...11 Gulf Oil Corp. v. Fuller, 695 S.W.2d 769 (Tex. App. El Paso 1985, orig. proceeding)...10 Hoffman v. State, 514 S.W.2d 248 (Tex. Criml App. 1974)...14 Huie v. DeShazo, 922 S.W.2d 920, 921 (Tex. 1996)...8 In Re D. Z., 869 S.W.2d 561 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 1993, writ denied)...10 In Re D.A.S., 951 S.W.2d 528 (Tex. App. Dallas 1997, no writ)...17 Jayne v. Bateman, 129 P.2d 188 (Ok. 1942)...18 Jim Walter Homes, Inc. v. Foster, 593 S.W.2d 749, 752 (Tex. Civ. App. Eastland 1979, no writ)...10 McGrede v. Rembert Nat l. Bank, 147 S.W.2d 580, 584 (Tex. Civ. App. Texarkana 1941, writ dism d judgm t cor.)...9 Morton v. Smith, 44 S.W. 683, 684 (Tex. Civ. App. 1898, no writ)...11 Mott v. State, 543 S.W.2d 623 (Tex. Criml App. 1976)...14 National Sur. Corp. v. Dominguez, 715 S.W.2d 67, 69 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 1986, orig. proceeding)...9 National Tank Co. v. Brotherton, 851 S.W.2d 193, (Tex. 1993)...16

6 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 6 Occidental Chem. Corp. v. Banales, 907 S.W.2d 488, 490 (Tex. 1995)...15 Ott v. State, 627 S.W.2d 218, 225 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 1981, pet ref d)...13, 14 Owens-Corning Fiberglas Crop. v. Caldwell, 818 S.W.2d 749, 750 (Tex. 1991)...13 Republic Ins. Co. v. Davis, 856 S.W.2d 158, (Tex. 1993)...16 Richardson v. State, 744 S.W.2d 65, (Tex. Crim. App. 1987), vacated on other grounds, 492 U.S. 914, 109 S.Ct (1989)...11 Rosebud v. State, 50 Tex. Crim. 475, 98 S.W. 858 (1906)...10 Skinner v. State, 956 S.W.2d 532 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997), cert. denied, U.S., 118 S.Ct (1998)...15 State v. Lowry, 802 S.W.2d 669, 673 (Tex. 1991)...16 Tex. Dept. of Mental Health and Mental Retardation v. Davis, 775 S.W.2d 467, (Tex. App. Austin 1989, orig proceeding)...9 Washington v. State, 856 S.W.2d 184, 187 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993)...15 West v. Solito, 563 S.W.2d 240 (Tex. 1978)...8 Wilson v. State, 705 S.W.2d 719 (Tex. App. Texarkana 1986, no pet. h.)...10, 11 Wood v. McCown, 784 S.W.2d 126, (Tex. App. Austin 1990, orig. proceeding)...15

7 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 7

8 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 8

9 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 9 STATE STATUTES Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Tex. Crim. Proc. Code art. 646 (1856)....8 Tex. Crim. Proc. Code art Tex. Crim. Proc. Code art Tex. Disciplinary R. Prof l Conduct Tex. Fam. Code , 13 Tex. Fam. Code Tex. R. Evid , 9, 10, 11, 16, 17 Tex. R. Civ. P , 14, 15, 16 OTHER AUTHORITIES Advisory Committee s Note to Proposed Federal Rule , Steven Goode, et. al., Guide to the Texas Rules of Evidence: Civil and Criminal (2d ed. 1993)....8 McCormick, Evidence, 87 (4 th ed. 1992)...8

10 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 10 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES By A. Michelle May 1. Introduction This article is intended to overview the application of the attorney-client and workproduct privileges to juvenile cases. This is a relatively unlitigated area, and therefore, requires interpretation and extrapolation from other areas. I have also included a discussion of my theory regarding the application of a client s representative to the juvenile client context. II. Attorney-Client Privilege The attorney-client privilege traces its ancestry back to the reign of Elizabeth I and beyond. 1 Steven Goode, et. al., Guide to the Texas Rules of Evidence: Civil and Criminal (2d ed. 1993). Previously, however, the privilege was premised on a consideration for the oath and honor of the attorney. Id. In the 18 th century, this rationale fell into disrepute, and the justification for the privilege shifted to a focus on the need for lawyers to be fully apprised of the facts in order to provide effective representation. Id., citing McCormick, Evidence, 87 (4 th ed. 1992). In Texas, the attorney-client privilege was accorded statutory recognition early in the state s history. Goode, supra, 503.1, citing Tex. Crim. Proc. Code art. 646 (1856). The privilege continues virtually A communication is unchanged in Texas law today. Its purpose is the promotion of unrestrained communication and contact between the lawyer and client in all matters in which the attorney s professional advice or services are sought, without fear that these confidential communications will be disclosed by the attorney, voluntarily or involuntarily, in any legal proceeding. Huie v. DeShazo, 922 S.W.2d 920, 921 (Tex. 1996); West v. Solito, 563 S.W.2d 240 (Tex. 1978). 1. Elements of the privilege. The attorney-client privilege in Texas is defined in Rule 503(b): A client has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent any other person from disclosing confidential communications made for the purpose of facilitating the rendition of professional legal services to the client. Tex. R. Evid. 503(b). 2. Confidential communications. Rule 503(a)(5) defines confidential communications as follows: confidential if not intended to

11 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 11 be disclosed to third persons other than those to whom disclosure is made in furtherance of the rendition of professional legal services to the client or those reasonably necessary for the transmission of the communication. Tex. R. Evid. 503(a)(5). The attorney-client privilege relates to communications made for the purpose of facilitating the delivery of professional legal advice and services to the client, but only when the attorney-client relationship has been established. However, communications made after the attorney has declined employment remain unprivileged. See McGrede v. Rembert Nat l. Bank, 147 S.W.2d 580, 584 (Tex. Civ. App. Texarkana 1941, writ dism d judgm t cor.). The privilege only attaches if the client consulted the attorney for the purpose of obtaining professional legal services. The attorney must be consulted in his capacity as an attorney. For example, if the attorney is acting as an accountant, bail bondsman, friend, or otherwise, the privilege is inapplicable. Clayton v. Canida, 233 S.W.2d 264, 266 (Tex. Civ. App. Texarkana 1949, no writ); Cathey v. State, 467 S.W.2d 472, (Tex. Crim. App. 1971); Modern Woodmen of Am. v. Watkins, 132 F.2d 352, 354 (5 th Cir. 1942); Childress v. Tate, 148 S.W. 843, 844 (Tex. Civ. App. Fort Worth 1912, writ ref d). when reasonably necessary for transmitting the communication or for the purpose of furthering the rendition of legal services, the communication is deemed confidential and qualifies for the privilege. However, the failure of a client to take reasonable precautions to ensure confidentiality may bear on intent. See National Sur. Corp. v. Dominguez, 715 S.W.2d 67, 69 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 1986, orig. proceeding); Tex. Dept. of Mental Health and Mental Retardation v. Davis, 775 S.W.2d 467, (Tex. App. Austin 1989, orig proceeding). A client s decision to divulge the communication to other persons may show that the client never intended his communications with counsel to be confidential. Cameron Co. v. Hinojosa, 760 S.W.2d 742, 746 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 1988, orig. proceeding). But, not all communications made in the presence of or disclosed to third parties are left unprotected by the privilege. Disclosures made to further the rendition of legal services to the client are deemed confidential. Thus, third parties such as spouses, parents, business associates, or joint clients may be included. See Advisory Committee s Note to Proposed Federal Rule 503. Further, when a third person is reasonably necessary to transmit communications between lawyer and client (such as an interpreter), his presence does not destroy confidentiality. Id. By focusing on intent, the rule protects clients from eavesdroppers. When the communication is made, if the parties intend that it be disclosed to third persons only

12 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 12 Verbal exchanges qualify as communications, regardless of whether the words are spoken or written. So, documents prepared to facilitate the attorney-client relationship are communications. Enos v. Baker, 751 S.W.2d 946, (Tex. App. Houston [14 th Dist.] 1988, orig proceeding). However, documents that antedate the relationship are not covered and cannot be immunized from disclosure by merely placing them in the attorney s hands. Communications may be made by conduct, such as facial as expressions, as well as by words. There is a question regarding whether there is a privilege regarding the client s identity and fee arrangements. Normally, Texas follows the widely accepted common law rule that such matters are not shielded from disclosure. Borden, Inc. v. Valdez, 773 S.W.2d 718, (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 1989, orig. proceeding); Duval County Ranch Co. v. Alamo Lumber Co., 663 S.W.2d 627, 634 (Tex. App. Amarillo 1983, writ ref d n.r.e.). However, there are narrowly carved exceptions to this general rule. For example, where revelation of the fee arrangements would tend to implicate the client in the commission of a crime or to show an admission on his part subjecting him to civil liability, the privilege remains intact. Jim Walter Homes, Inc. v. Foster, 593 S.W.2d 749, 752 (Tex. Civ. App. Eastland 1979, no writ). 3. Special criminal privilege. In criminal cases, there is a special privilege that prevents the lawyer or lawyer s representative from disclosing any facts not necessarily confidential in nature, which came to the knowledge of the lawyer or lawyer s representative by reason of the attorney-client relationship. Tex. R. Evid. 503(b)(2). This rule was derived from former article of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which was repealed and replaced by this rule. It is likely that the courts will apply this rule to juvenile cases, despite the restrictions. First, it is formerly part of chapter 38, which has been specifically applied to juvenile cases. Tex. Fam. Code 51.17(c). Second, juvenile cases are quasicriminal in nature and are afforded the same protections and due process requirements as in adult criminal proceedings. In Re D. Z., 869 S.W.2d 561 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 1993, writ denied). 4. Covered by privilege. The privilege covers communications between or among the client; the client s representative; the lawyer; the lawyer s representative; or the client, client s representative, lawyer or lawyer s representative representing another party in a pending action and concerning a matter of common interest in the pending action. Tex. R. Evid. 503(b)(1). Note, however, that statements between co-defendants, without a lawyer present, may not be privileged. Compare United States v. Gotti, 771 F.Supp. 535, 545 (E.D.N.Y. 1991), with Gulf Oil Corp. v. Fuller, 695 S.W.2d 769 (Tex. App. El Paso 1985, orig. proceeding).

13 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 13 A client is a natural person who, or any kind of entity which, is rendered professional legal services by a lawyer, or who consults a lawyer with a view to obtaining legal services from him. Tex. R. Evid. 503(a)(1). A representative of the client is one having authority to obtain professional legal services, or to act on advice rendered pursuant thereto, on behalf of a client. Id. It has been held, generally, that the privilege extends only to the attorney and persons who are the media of communication between him and the client. Burnett v. State, 642 S.W.2d 765 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982)(en banc); Wilson v. State, 705 S.W.2d 719 (Tex. App. Texarkana 1986, no pet. h.). Since at least 1885, the privilege has been held to include friends or witnesses acting with the attorney and the individual client for the provision of the legal services. Rosebud v. State, 50 Tex. Crim. 475, 98 S.W. 858 (1906). A lawyer is a person authorized, or reasonably believed by the client to be authorized, to engage in the practice of law in any state or nation. Id. The lawyer need not be a member of the bar of the jurisdiction in which his counsel is sought. See Advisory Committee s Note to Proposed Federal Rule 503. Further, sometimes the lawyer need not be a lawyer confidential communications by a client to a person he reasonably believes to be a lawyer fall within the privilege. See, e.g., United States v. Tyler, 745 F.Supp. 423 (W.D.Mich. 1990); But see, Richardson v. State, 744 S.W.2d 65, (Tex. Crim. App. 1987), vacated on other grounds, 492 U.S. 914, 109 S.Ct (1989). A representative of the lawyer is someone employed by the lawyer to assist in the rendition of legal services. Tex. R. Evid. 503(a)(4). So, communications made to office personnel such as law clerks and secretaries fall within the privilege s scope. See Wilson at 720; But see, Morton v. Smith, 44 S.W. 683, 684 (Tex. Civ. App. 1898, no writ). In addition, it has become generally accepted that the scope of the attorney-client privilege encompasses agents whose services are required by the attorney in order to properly prepare his client s case. Ballew v. State, 640 S.W.2d 237, (Tex. Crim. App. 1980). This applies to consulting expert witnesses only. Where a psychiatrist is retained to examine a client and advise the lawyer concerning the client s mental state, communications made to and by the expert are privileged. Burnett at 769; Ballew at When an expert is hired with the expectation that he will testify at trial, there is no intention that the communications will remain confidential. 5. Application of the privilege. The attorney-client privilege belongs to the client and lasts, unless waived, as long as the client desires. It is not affected by the resolution of the particular controversy or termination of the attorney-client relationship. Bearden v. Boone, 693 S.W.2d 25, (Tex. App. Amarillo 1985, orig. proceeding). Although the primary matter protected by the privilege is a communication from the client to the lawyer, the statements and advice of the attorney are privileged as well. Dewitt and Rearick, Inc. v. Ferguson, 699 S.W.2d 692, 693 (Tex. App. El Paso 1985, orig proceeding). The privilege

14 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 14 attaches not just to the legal advice, but also to the complete communication between the client and the attorney, including communications containing factual The privilege may be claimed by the client or client s representative; the client s guardian or conservator; the personal representative of a deceased client; or the successor, trustee, or similar representative of a client that is a corporation, association, or other organization, whether or not in existence. Tex. R. Evid. 503(c). The client s lawyer or lawyer s representative at the time of the communication may also claim the privilege but only on behalf of the client. Id. So, the attorney has no standing to claim the privilege in his or her own behalf. Cole v. Gabriel, 822 S.W.2d 296 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 1991, orig proceeding). F. Exceptions and Limitations The attorney-client privilege contains a number of specific exceptions. These exceptions also apply to the work-product doctrine. 1. Crime/fraud exception There is no privilege if the services of counsel were sought or obtained to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit what the client knew or reasonably should have known to be a crime or fraud. The crime-fraud exception applies only when a prima facie case is made of contemplated fraud. The fact that the cause of action involves fraudulent conduct is insufficient. The attorney-client privilege is lost only when the legal communications or services information. GAF Corp. v. Caldwell, 839 S.W.2d 149, 151 (Tex. App. Houston [14 th Dist.] 1992, orig proceeding). were obtained in order to commit or plan to commit a fraud. 2. Breach of Duty No privilege extends to a communication relevant to an issue of breach of duty by a lawyer to the client or by the client to the lawyer. 3. Joint Clients Communications involving joint clients may not be privileged. When a communication is relevant to a matter of common interest between or among two or more clients, and the communication was made by any of them to a lawyer retained or consulted in common, there is no privilege when the communication is offered in an action between or among any of the clients. 4. Waiver The attorney-client privilege may be waived by the client. Thus, the client may consent to the giving of testimony by his attorney in respect to privileged communications. On the other hand, the attorney may not ordinarily disclose privileged communications over the client s objection. The privilege is waived when the client voluntarily testifies to the communication or permits another person to do so without objection.

15 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 15 The privilege must be raised with specificity or it is waived. Disclosure of attorney-client privileged information to third persons waives the privilege. By definition, the communications are intended to be kept confidential between the attorney and client. Therefore, disclosing the communication to a third party is an absolute waiver. (But, see 1. Offensive Use A party seeking affirmative relief may not use a privilege to prevent an opposing party from discovering outcome determinative information regarding the nature of the claim. An offensive use of a privilege may be found even if the privilege is asserted as a defense to a defense by a party seeking affirmative relief. The elements of the offensive use waiver are as follows: 1. The party asserting the privilege is seeking affirmative relief. 2. The privileged information sought must be such that, if believed by the fact finder, in all probabilty it would be outcome determinative of the cause of action asserted. Mere relevance is inusfficient, a contradiction in position without more is insufficient, and the confidential communication must go to the very heart of the affirmative relief sought. 3. Disclosure of the confidential communication is the only means by which the aggrieved party may obtain the evidence. III. Work-Product Privilege the discussion below regarding what third parties may be included within the privilege.) However, the work-product privilege is intended to prevent the opposing party to the litigation from obtaining the information; therefore, disclosure of workproduct to third persons who do not disclose it to the opposing party does not necessarily waive the work-product privilege. The work-product privilege is derived from the landmark United States Supreme Court opinion of Hickman v. Taylor: Proper presentation of a client s case demands that [the attorney] assemble information, sift what he considers to be the relevant from the irrelevant facts, prepare his legal theories and plan his strategy without undue and needless interference.... This work is reflected, of course, in interviews, statements, memoranda, correspondence, briefs, mental impressions, personal beliefs, and countless other intangible ways aptly though roughly termed work product of the lawyer. Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U. S. 495, 511, 67 S.Ct. 385 (1947). Thus the work-product doctrine, unlike the attorney-client privilege is not concerned with the protection of client confidences. Rather, its purpose is to shelter the mental processes of the attorney by providing a privileged area within which the lawyer can analyze and prepare the case. United States

16 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 16 v. Nobles, 422 U.S. 225, 238, 95 S.Ct (1975); See also Owens-Corning Fiberglas Crop. v. Caldwell, 818 S.W.2d 749, 750 It is unclear whether the Texas civil or criminal work product privilege applies to juvenile cases. The civil privilege is found in the civil discovery rules. Tex. R. Civ. P As the civil discovery procedures have been held inapplicable to juvenile proceedings, the civil work product privilege may not apply either. Tex. Fam. Code The criminal work product privilege is contained in relatively undeveloped case law. See Nobles at 238, 2170; Ott v. State, 627 S.W.2d 218, 225 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 1981, pet ref d). The law is undeveloped due to the fact that discovery in adult criminal proceedings is one-sided, so the opportunity to litigate the work product privilege does not arise very often. Since it is a yet unresolved point of juvenile law, both civil and criminal privileges will be discussed. A. Civil Work-Product Privilege. The attorney work-product privilege exemption was added to the Texas civil discovery rules in The 1999 amendments to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure made a wholesale revision to this privilege. The new rule defines the scope of the privilege and expressly absorbs the traditional party communication privilege into the work product privilege. Significantly, the formerly separate privileged status for witness statements prepared or taken in anticipation of litigation has been expressly eliminated and witness statements are not work product, even if made in anticipation of litigation. (Tex. 1991). Texas Rule of Civil Procedure provides that work product is not discoverable. Work product is now defined as material prepared or mental impressions developed in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for a party or a party s representatives. Work product also encompasses a communication made in anticipation of litigation or for trial between a party and the party s representatives or among a party s representatives. The new discovery rules divide workproduct into two categories. First, core work-product is defined as the work product of an attorney or an attorney s representative that contains the attorney s or the attorney s representative s mental impressions, opinions, conclusions, or legal theories. Core work product is NEVER discoverable. Other materials, mental impressions, and communications that fall within the definition of work product but do not qualify as core work-product are discoverable only upon a showing that the party seeking discovery has a substantial need for the material in the preparation of the party s case, and that the party is unable to obtain the substantial equivalent of the material by other means without undue hardship. B. Criminal Work-Product Privilege. The work-product doctrine is equally applicable to both criminal and civil litigation. As the United States Supreme Court stated in Nobles:

17 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 17 Although the work-product doctrine most frequently is asserted as a bar to discover in civil litigation, its role in assuring the proper functioning of the criminal justice system is even more vital. The interests of society and the accused in obtaining a fair and accurate resolution of the question of guilt Almost all of the Texas criminal cases discussing work product relates to the prosecutor s right to resist discovery. Tex. Crim. Proc. Code That provision permits the defendant, upon showing of good cause, to obtain copies of several types of materials from the prosecution, except the written statements of witnesses and the work product of counsel and their investigators. Id.. The Court of Criminal Appeals had interpreted this work-product exemption to reach offense or invetigative reports prepared by the police, internal files or papers of the prosecution, statements prepared after interviews of prospective witnesses, and reports regarding chemical analyses. Brem v. State, 571 S.W.2d 314 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Mott v. State, 543 S.W.2d 623 (Tex. Criml App. 1976); Hoffman v. State, 514 S.W.2d 248 (Tex. Criml App. 1974); Alba v. State, 492 S.W.2d 555 (Tex. Crim. App. 1973). Since criminal discovery in Texas is generally a one-way street, courts have rarely been called upon to address the issue of defense counsel s work product rights. The first case to reach the Court of Criminal Appeals involved the prosecution s attempt to obtain a copy of a tape-recorded interview between a defense investigator and a or innocence demand that adequate safeguards assure the thorough preparation and presentation of each side of the case. Nobles at 238, The work product privilege was incorporated in Texas common law for criminal cases in Ott at 224. prosecution witness. Washington v. State, 856 S.W.2d 184, 187 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). After the defense cross-examined the witness concerning some statements he made during the interview, the trial court ordered the production of the tape and allowed the prosecution to play it for the jury. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed, holding that the tape recording was work product because the interview was conducted to prepare the defense case for trial. Id. at 189. The Court noted that the interview was aimed at gathering information for impeachment purposes and aiding the defense in evaluating the state s case. Id. at 188. The Court reaffirmed this approach to work product in Skinner v. State. Skinner v. State, 956 S.W.2d 532 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997), cert. denied, U.S., 118 S.Ct (1998). There, the Court held that the work-product privilege attached to a document created by a defense expert for purposes of discussion with defense counsel. Id. at Because the document revealed the expert s views about the strengths and weaknesses of the defense theory, the Court deemed it highly privileged work product. Id. at 538. Moreover, the defendant s use of the expert

18 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 18 as a witness did not waive the work-product protection. The Court emphasized that waiver occurred only when the witness made testimonial use of the work product material. Id. at 539. Testimonial use is equated with use before the jury and the Court stated that a document is used before the jury when it is either shown to a witness on the stand, identified by a witness, or partially read aloud to the jury. Id. at 539. Protection against non-compelled disclosure of a client s confidential communications to his attorney comes from C. Scope of the Privilege. Since the work-product privilege belongs to the attorney, it is the attorney who must claim it. The work-product exemption is continuing in duration and extends beyond the conclusion of the litigation for which the work was done. Occidental Chem. Corp. v. Banales, 907 S.W.2d 488, 490 (Tex. 1995). Specifically, work-product exempted in a prior criminal case is also protected from disclosure in a subsequent civil matter. Wood v. McCown, 784 S.W.2d 126, (Tex. App. Austin 1990, orig. proceeding). With the new civil work-product rule, it is yet unclear whether the continuing nature of the privilege will be continued. It is highly probable that it will be at least applied to core work product. Tex. R. Civ. P (b)(1). An objection based on attorney-client privilege does not preserve for appeal a claim based on the work-product doctrine. the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. Pursuant to Rule 1.05, attorneys ordinarily are proscribed from knowingly revealing confidential information (including both privileged information and all other information relating to a client or furnished by a client that is acquired by the lawyer during the course or by reason of the representation of the client. Tex. Disciplinary R. Prof l Conduct So, the disciplinary rules require attorneys to keep confidential much that is not considered privileged. Carmona v. State, 941 S.W.2d 949 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). 1. Exceptions and Limitations. All of the exceptions applicable to attorney-client privilege also apply to the work-product doctrine, like the crime/fraud exception, offensive use, and waiver. The party resisting discovery has the burden to prove that the communication was made or the evidence acquired or developed in anticipation of the particular lawsuit in which the exemption is claimed. Republic Ins. Co. v. Davis, 856 S.W.2d 158, (Tex. 1993). Further, in order to qualify as workproduct in civil cases, the material, mental impressions, or communications must have been produced or made in anticipation of litigation or for trial. Tex. R. Civ. P (a). The anticipation of litigation test is satisfied whenever: 1. A reasonable person would have concluded from the totality of the

19 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 19 circumstances surrounding the investigation that there was a substantial chance that litigation would ensue; and, 2. The party resisting discovery believed in good faith that there was a substantial chance that litigation would ensue and conducted the investigation for the purpose of preparing for such litigation. National Tank Co. v. Brotherton, 851 The civil procedure rules absolutely exempt core work product, as discussed above. Other work product may be discovered but only if the party seeking the discovery has a substantial need for the materials to prepare the party s case and that party is unable to obtain the substantial equivalent of the material by other means without undue hardship. Tex. R. Civ. P (b)(2). The Texas Supreme Court has noted that the substantial need and hardship exception has been rarely invoked in Texas, but one case found that both the substantial need and undue hardship requirements were met when the parties seeking discovery attempted to discover information amassed by the state from responses to civil investigative demands made on third parties. State v. Lowry, 802 S.W.2d 669, 673 (Tex. 1991). Further, the Beaumont Court of Appeals, noting that the exception was underdeveloped in Texas, looked to federal case law to support its determination that credibility issues and the failing memory of a witness who had been interviewed by opposing counsel satisfied the substantial need and undue hardship exception. Dillard Dep t Stores, Inc. v. Sanderson, 928 S.W.2d 319, 321 (Tex. App. Beaumont 1996, orig. proceeding). S.W.2d 193, (Tex. 1993). A substantial chance of litigation means that litigation is more than an abstract possibility or unwarranted fear. The underlying inquiry is whether it was reasonable for the investigating party to anticipate litigation and prepare accordingly. Id. at 204. IV. Application to Juvenile Law Despite any direct law on the subject, obviously juveniles are going to be protected by the attorney-client and work-product privileges. An interesting question arises when contemplating who is a client s representative in the juvenile context. Consider the following points: A client is defined to include a natural person. Tex. R. Evid A client s representative includes one who has the authority to obtain legal services on behalf of the client or one who acts on the legal advice rendered. Tex. R. Evid A minor does not have the legal capacity to employ counsel or anyone to watch over his interests. Byrd v. Woodruff, 891 S.W.2d 689 (Tex. App. Dallas 1994, writ dism d); Coleson v. Bethan, 931 S.W.2d 706 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 1996, no writ); In Re D.A.S., 951 S.W.2d 528 (Tex. App. Dallas 1997, no writ). Disclosures made to third parties to

20 ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGES PAGE 20 further rendition of legal services are confidential communications. Tex. R. Evid A juvenile cannot waive privileges unless the waiver is in writing and Johnny goes home one morning after a long night out and tells his mother that he needs a lawyer. His mother asks why he needs a lawyer (trying to figure out what kind of lawyer he needs). Johnny tells her that he needs a criminal lawyer because during the night he stole a car, ran from the police and would probably be arrested pretty soon. Johnny gets arrested and placed in detention. So, Mom goes and hires the world s greatest juvenile defense lawyer. At the detention hearing, Mom testifies trying to get the Judge to release her son to come back home. The State asks her about her conversations with Johnny about the events and his actions. The defense attorney objects based upon attorney-client privilege.! In this scenario, isn t Mom acting as a representative of Johnny in hiring the attorney?! Wasn t the conversation (i.e., confession ) held for the purpose of obtaining legal services and getting legal advice?! Wasn t Mom within the media of communication between the lawyer and Johnny? signed by he and his attorney. Tex. Fam. Code So, consider the following hypothetical:! So, wouldn t that conversation be privileged? Even if Johnny had discussed the full details of the events in this scenario with Mom, I believe the privilege would still apply. This would be especially true if there were some impediments or hardships to the attorney interviewing the client and obtaining full information, like if Johnny were being housed in an out-of-county juvenile facility. Query: What happens if the crime Johnny committed was a crime against his mother so their interests conflict? Does that change the application of the client s representative designation and application of the privilege? I think any such communications which occur while the Mother is charged with representing the child s best interest are privileged. But, when a parent s interests conflict with the child s, then the court should appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the child s best interests. Then, communications between the guardian ad litem, the child, and the child s lawyer would be privileged. Further, since the child cannot waive the privilege except under very strict circumstances, wouldn t it be a breach of fiduciary duty for the guardian ad litem (or the attorney, for that matter) to reveal confidential communications to anyone

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 05-0613 444444444444 IN RE BEXAR COUNTY CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY S OFFICE, RELATOR 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION FOR

More information

Writ of Mandamus is Conditionally Granted; Opinion Filed December 3, 2013. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Writ of Mandamus is Conditionally Granted; Opinion Filed December 3, 2013. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas Writ of Mandamus is Conditionally Granted; Opinion Filed December 3, 2013. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-01457-CV IN RE SOUTHPAK CONTAINER CORPORATION AND CLEVELAND

More information

T H E S T A T E B A R O F T E X A S ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP

T H E S T A T E B A R O F T E X A S ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP T H E S T A T E B A R O F T E X A S ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP A client s relationship with a lawyer is unique. Lawyers and clients must be able to communicate freely for clients to receive the help

More information

Investigative Privileges

Investigative Privileges Investigative Privileges Presented by: JERRY FAZIO 7557 Rambler Road, Suite 1465 Dallas, Texas 75231 (214) 891-5960 - Telephone (214) 891-5966 Facsimile jfazio@owenfazio.com Section I Witness Statements

More information

Attorney-Client Privilege. Olson & Olson LLP 10th Annual Local Government Seminar. January 30, 2014

Attorney-Client Privilege. Olson & Olson LLP 10th Annual Local Government Seminar. January 30, 2014 Attorney-Client Privilege Olson & Olson LLP 10th Annual Eric C. Farrar 713-533-3818 efarrar@olsonllp.com I. Introduction The attorney-client privilege is the oldest of the privileges for confidential communications

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued November 7, 2014 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-14-00704-CV IN RE BAYTOWN NISSAN INC., BURKLEIN FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, FREDERICK W. BURKLEIN AND J. CARY

More information

NUMBER 13-11-00757-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

NUMBER 13-11-00757-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG NUMBER 13-11-00757-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ROYSTON, RAYZOR, VICKERY & WILLIAMS, L.L.P., Appellant, v. FRANCISCO FRANK LOPEZ, Appellee. On appeal from

More information

FACTUAL BACKGROUND. former co-workers of the decedents with whom they worked at common job sites, in common

FACTUAL BACKGROUND. former co-workers of the decedents with whom they worked at common job sites, in common SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION This Document Refers To: WALTER SKY x Index No.: 105281/2000 RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPECIAL MASTER FACTUAL

More information

Expert Witness Disclosure and Privilege (Federal & New York)

Expert Witness Disclosure and Privilege (Federal & New York) George Sacco, Esq. Purcell & Ingrao GSaccolaw@aol.com September 2, 2011 Expert Witness Disclosure and Privilege (Federal & New York) FEDERAL Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) Rule 26(A)(2) governs

More information

CASE EVALUATION AND PREPARATION DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE

CASE EVALUATION AND PREPARATION DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE CASE EVALUATION AND PREPARATION DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE Solo and Small Firm Conference James R. Hobbs Wyrsch Hobbs & Mirakian, PC In assessing a criminal case, there are many factors that need to be considered

More information

Court of Appeals. Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

Court of Appeals. Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont NO. 09-10-00074-CV IN RE JEFFERSON COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT Original Proceeding OPINION Jefferson County Appraisal District ( JCAD ) seeks a

More information

and IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AUSTIN, TEXAS

and IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AUSTIN, TEXAS IN THE 242 ND DISTRICT COURT OF SWISHER COUNTY, TEXAS and IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AUSTIN, TEXAS THE STATE OF TEXAS ) Writ Nos. 51,824 01, -02, -03, -04 ) (Trial Court Cause Nos. ) B-3340-9907-CR,

More information

Can You Keep A Secret? How the Attorney- Client and Self-Evaluative Privileges Can Apply to Your Compliance Practice

Can You Keep A Secret? How the Attorney- Client and Self-Evaluative Privileges Can Apply to Your Compliance Practice Can You Keep A Secret? How the Attorney- Client and Self-Evaluative Privileges Can Apply to Your Compliance Practice Pamela J. Grimm grimmp@msx.upmc.edu Associate Counsel UPMC Health System 200 Lothrop

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION Kimlyn Cline Plaintiff, v. Advanced Medical Optics, Inc., Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:08-CV-62 (TJW) MEMORANDUM

More information

INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL/ATTORNEY ETHICS

INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL/ATTORNEY ETHICS INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL/ATTORNEY ETHICS Prepared and presented by: Wm. Reagan Wynn Kearney & Westfall 120 W. 3rd St., Suite 300 Fort Worth, TX 76102 817/336-5600 FAX: 817/336-5610 I. Standard

More information

KEN PAXTON ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

KEN PAXTON ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS KEN PAXTON ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS October 19, 2015 The Honorable Sharen Wilson Opinion No. KP-0041 Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney 401 West Belknap Re: Discoverability under Brady v. Maryland

More information

STATE OF NEW YORK PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

STATE OF NEW YORK PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Patricia L. Acampora, Chairwoman Maureen F. Harris Robert E. Curry, Jr. Cheryl A. Buley STATE OF NEW YORK PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION At a session of the Public Service Commission

More information

Reflections on Ethical Issues In the Tripartite Relationship

Reflections on Ethical Issues In the Tripartite Relationship Reflections on Ethical Issues In the Tripartite Relationship [click] By Bruce A. Campbell 1 Introduction In most areas of the practice of law, there are a number of ethical issues that arise on a frequent

More information

Wes Bearden, Attorney Texas Certified Investigator; TALI General Counsel Dallas, Texas Region 1 Meeting; April 2014

Wes Bearden, Attorney Texas Certified Investigator; TALI General Counsel Dallas, Texas Region 1 Meeting; April 2014 Wes Bearden, Attorney Texas Certified Investigator; TALI General Counsel Dallas, Texas Region 1 Meeting; April 2014 Are your communications confidential? Disclosure v. Privilege Disclosure DPS PSB Rules

More information

Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1130 Filed 07/09/14 Page 1 of 5

Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1130 Filed 07/09/14 Page 1 of 5 Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1130 Filed 07/09/14 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, ET AL, Plaintiffs, v. RICK

More information

SIGNED this 31st day of August, 2010.

SIGNED this 31st day of August, 2010. SIGNED this 31st day of August, 2010. CRAIG A. GARGOTTA UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION IN RE: ' CASE NO. 09-12799-CAG

More information

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-13-00125-CV CHRISTOPHER EDOMWANDE APPELLANT V. JULIO GAZA & SANDRA F. GAZA APPELLEES ---------- FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF TARRANT COUNTY

More information

What to Do When Your Witness Testimony Doesn t Match His or Her Declaration

What to Do When Your Witness Testimony Doesn t Match His or Her Declaration What to Do When Your Witness Testimony Doesn t Match His or Her Declaration Russell R. Yurk Jennings, Haug & Cunningham, L.L.P. 2800 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1800 Phoenix, AZ 85004-1049 (602) 234-7819

More information

PRIVILEGES AND WORK PRODUCT HOW TO GET INFORMATION AND HOW

PRIVILEGES AND WORK PRODUCT HOW TO GET INFORMATION AND HOW PRIVILEGES AND WORK PRODUCT HOW TO GET INFORMATION AND HOW TO PROTECT IT University of Houston Law Foundation HOW TO OFFER AND EXCLUDE EVIDENCE Houston July 9-10, 2009 Dallas July 16-17, 2009 David M.

More information

THE PREROGATIVES OF PRIVILEGES: THE ETHICS OF PROTECTING OUR PLANNING CLIENTS (EVEN FROM THEMSELVES!)

THE PREROGATIVES OF PRIVILEGES: THE ETHICS OF PROTECTING OUR PLANNING CLIENTS (EVEN FROM THEMSELVES!) THE PREROGATIVES OF PRIVILEGES: THE ETHICS OF PROTECTING OUR PLANNING CLIENTS (EVEN FROM THEMSELVES!) 50 TH Annual Heckerling Institute on Estate Planning Orlando, Florida January 12, 2015 STEPHANIE LOOMIS-PRICE

More information

TENNESSEE ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS ANNUAL DUI TRAINING 2010 TUNICA, MISSISSIPPI - OCTOBER 21-22, 2010

TENNESSEE ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS ANNUAL DUI TRAINING 2010 TUNICA, MISSISSIPPI - OCTOBER 21-22, 2010 TENNESSEE ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS ANNUAL DUI TRAINING 2010 TUNICA, MISSISSIPPI - OCTOBER 21-22, 2010 Glenn R. Funk 117 Union Street Nashville, TN 37201 (615) 255-9595 ETHICS IN DUI DEFENSE

More information

Case 3:09-cv-00748-B Document 23 Filed 09/23/09 Page 1 of 8 PageID 649 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Case 3:09-cv-00748-B Document 23 Filed 09/23/09 Page 1 of 8 PageID 649 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION Case 3:09-cv-00748-B Document 23 Filed 09/23/09 Page 1 of 8 PageID 649 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ESTATE OF JOHNNY FISHER, Dec d, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION

More information

But, what if another lawyer later comes forward with a piece of paper that shows a

But, what if another lawyer later comes forward with a piece of paper that shows a BEWARE THE HIDDEN LAWYER By Fred A. Simpson and John R. Clayton 1 When your civil defendant-client lawsuit settles with plaintiff for $100,000, and your client is released from all plaintiff claims, that

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-14-00822-CV In re Harlan Levien, Stephen Levien, Kenneth Ives, and Parvin Johnson, Jr. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM BASTROP COUNTY M E M O R A N D U

More information

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

Fourteenth Court of Appeals Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed August 16, 2001. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-00-00177-CV HENRY P. MASSEY AND ANN A. MASSEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF COURTNEY

More information

The Foundation of Juvenile Practice Part 1: You are Adversary Counsel, NOT a GAL! Private Bar Certification Forensic Exercise November 19, 2014

The Foundation of Juvenile Practice Part 1: You are Adversary Counsel, NOT a GAL! Private Bar Certification Forensic Exercise November 19, 2014 The Foundation of Juvenile Practice Part 1: You are Adversary Counsel, NOT a GAL! Private Bar Certification Forensic Exercise November 19, 2014 Role of Juvenile Defense Counsel: Forensic Exercise: Question

More information

A Citizen s Guide to the Criminal Justice System: From Arraignment to Appeal

A Citizen s Guide to the Criminal Justice System: From Arraignment to Appeal A Citizen s Guide to the Criminal Justice System: From Arraignment to Appeal Presented by the Office of the Richmond County District Attorney Acting District Attorney Daniel L. Master, Jr. 130 Stuyvesant

More information

Case 5:14-cv-00093-RS-GRJ Document 21 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 9

Case 5:14-cv-00093-RS-GRJ Document 21 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 9 Case 5:14-cv-00093-RS-GRJ Document 21 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 9 MARY SOWELL et al., Plaintiffs, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION Page 1 of

More information

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS, v. LAURA G. RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, Appellee. No. 08-11-00235-CV Appeal from the County Court at Law No.

More information

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-14-00020-CR EX PARTE DIMAS ROJAS MARTINEZ ---------- FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY ---------- MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 ----------

More information

The Role of Defense Counsel in Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims

The Role of Defense Counsel in Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims The Role of Defense Counsel in Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims I. Every criminal defense lawyer will, at sometime or another, be challenged as ineffective it comes with the territory. It is natural

More information

Case 2:11-cv-01174-TS-PMW Document 257 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION

Case 2:11-cv-01174-TS-PMW Document 257 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION Case 2:11-cv-01174-TS-PMW Document 257 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, a Utah municipal corporation;

More information

NO. 01-03-00062-CV. D. B., Appellant. K. B., Appellee. On Appeal from the 311th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No.

NO. 01-03-00062-CV. D. B., Appellant. K. B., Appellee. On Appeal from the 311th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. Opinion issued August 12, 2004 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-03-00062-CV D. B., Appellant V. K. B., Appellee On Appeal from the 311th District Court Harris County, Texas

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-13-00632-CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-13-00632-CV AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed June 16, 2014. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-00632-CV OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Appellant V. GINGER WEATHERSPOON, Appellee On Appeal

More information

Case 5:09-cv-00910-FB Document 35 Filed 10/20/10 Page 1 of 5

Case 5:09-cv-00910-FB Document 35 Filed 10/20/10 Page 1 of 5 Case :09-cv-00910-FB Document Filed 10/0/10 Page 1 of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION CARL DWIGHT DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. SA-09-CA-910-FB

More information

ETHICS IN JUVENILE CASES THE DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE

ETHICS IN JUVENILE CASES THE DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE ETHICS IN JUVENILE CASES THE DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE 19 th ANNUAL JUVENILE LAW CONFERENCE PROFESSOR ROBERT O. DAWSON JUVENILE LAW INSTITUTE February 22 24, 2006 Westin Park Central Hotel Dallas, Texas BRIAN

More information

to add a number of affirmative defenses, including an allegation that Henry s claim was barred

to add a number of affirmative defenses, including an allegation that Henry s claim was barred REVERSE and REMAND; and Opinion Filed May 11, 2015. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-00616-CV DOROTHY HENRY, Appellant V. BASSAM ZAHRA, Appellee On Appeal from the

More information

MODEL CRIMINAL DEFENSE MENTORING PROGRAM Utah State Bar New Lawyer Training Program

MODEL CRIMINAL DEFENSE MENTORING PROGRAM Utah State Bar New Lawyer Training Program MODEL CRIMINAL DEFENSE MENTORING PROGRAM Utah State Bar New Lawyer Training Program The following is submitted as a Model Mentoring Plan for the criminal defense practice field. It was prepared by an experienced

More information

MARK PEREZ, APPELLANT THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE STATE S BRIEF

MARK PEREZ, APPELLANT THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE STATE S BRIEF Nos. 05-11-01575-CR and 05-11-01576-CR The State Waives Oral Argument 5th Court of Appeals FILED: 06/04/2012 14:00 Lisa Matz, Clerk IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS MARK

More information

Nebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No. 09-03. Question Presented. Facts

Nebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No. 09-03. Question Presented. Facts Nebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No. 09-03 IF THE VICTIM IN A CRIMINAL CASE THAT A COUNTY ATTORNEY IS PROSECUTING HAS RETAINED COUNSEL TO REPRESENT HIM IN A CIVIL CASE ARISING FROM THE SAME

More information

ETHICAL ISSUES IN THE EMPLOYMENT CONTEXT

ETHICAL ISSUES IN THE EMPLOYMENT CONTEXT ETHICAL ISSUES IN THE EMPLOYMENT CONTEXT Mark J. Oberti Oberti Sullivan LLP 723 Main Street, Suite 340 Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 401-3556 mark@osattorneys.com Edwin Sullivan Oberti Sullivan LLP 723 Main

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-15-00813-CV. IN RE TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES AND TRUMBULL INSURANCE COMPANY, Relators

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-15-00813-CV. IN RE TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES AND TRUMBULL INSURANCE COMPANY, Relators Conditionally Grant and Opinion Filed August 26, 2015 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-15-00813-CV IN RE TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES AND TRUMBULL INSURANCE COMPANY, Relators

More information

The Interaction Between the Rules of Professional Conduct and Malpractice Actions in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia

The Interaction Between the Rules of Professional Conduct and Malpractice Actions in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia The Interaction Between the Rules of Professional Conduct and Malpractice Actions in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia By Dennis J. Quinn and Elizabeth A. Francis 1 The sanctioning of an

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 13-0761 444444444444 IN RE NATIONAL LLOYDS INSURANCE COMPANY, RELATOR 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

More information

DALLAS BAR ASSOCIATION TRIAL SKILLS SECTION NOVEMBER 17, 2015. By: Robert L. Tobey Johnston Tobey Baruch, P.C. www.johnstontobey.

DALLAS BAR ASSOCIATION TRIAL SKILLS SECTION NOVEMBER 17, 2015. By: Robert L. Tobey Johnston Tobey Baruch, P.C. www.johnstontobey. DALLAS BAR ASSOCIATION TRIAL SKILLS SECTION NOVEMBER 17, 2015 By: Robert L. Tobey Johnston Tobey Baruch, P.C. www.johnstontobey.com A. Lawyers owe their clients a fiduciary duty. Breach of fiduciary duty

More information

Offering Defense Witnesses to New York Grand Juries. Your client has just been held for the action of the Grand Jury. Although you

Offering Defense Witnesses to New York Grand Juries. Your client has just been held for the action of the Grand Jury. Although you Offering Defense Witnesses to New York Grand Juries By: Mark M. Baker 1 Your client has just been held for the action of the Grand Jury. Although you have a valid defense, you do not want your client to

More information

Case 1:13-cr-20850-UU Document 43 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/14/14 11:43:07 Page 1 of 10

Case 1:13-cr-20850-UU Document 43 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/14/14 11:43:07 Page 1 of 10 Case 1:13-cr-20850-UU Document 43 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/14/14 11:43:07 Page 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. RAFAEL COMAS, Defendant. / UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI

More information

ISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct

ISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct ISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct ISBA Advisory Opinions on Professional Conduct are prepared as an educational service to members of the ISBA. While the Opinions express the ISBA interpretation

More information

Drafting the Joint Defense Agreement

Drafting the Joint Defense Agreement Drafting the Joint Defense Agreement (with Sample Provisions) Daralyn J. Durie Joint defense agreements have some obvious advantages, but some not-so-obvious disadvantages. If you plan to enter into one,

More information

GUIDELINES FOR ATTORNEYS FOR CHILDREN IN THE FOURTH DEPARTMENT

GUIDELINES FOR ATTORNEYS FOR CHILDREN IN THE FOURTH DEPARTMENT NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT HONORABLE HENRY J. SCUDDER PRESIDING JUSTICE GUIDELINES FOR ATTORNEYS FOR CHILDREN IN THE FOURTH DEPARTMENT PREFACE The Departmental Advisory

More information

Rule 26. General Provisions Governing Discovery.

Rule 26. General Provisions Governing Discovery. Published on Arkansas Judiciary (https://courts.arkansas.gov) Rule 26. General Provisions Governing Discovery. (a) Discovery Methods. Parties may obtain discovery by one or more of the following methods:

More information

ISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct

ISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct ISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct ISBA Advisory Opinions on Professional Conduct are prepared as an educational service to members of the ISBA. While the Opinions express the ISBA interpretation

More information

*Rule 1.4(a) *Rule 1.16(a) *Rule 1.16(a)(2) *Rule 1.16(b) *Rule 3.3 *DR7-102(A)(4) *DR7-102(A)(6)

*Rule 1.4(a) *Rule 1.16(a) *Rule 1.16(a)(2) *Rule 1.16(b) *Rule 3.3 *DR7-102(A)(4) *DR7-102(A)(6) NEW HAMPSHIRE BAR ASSOCIATION Ethics Committee Formal Opinion 1993-94/7 Candor to Tribunal: Use of Questionable Evidence In Criminal Defense January 27, 1994 RULE REFERENCES: *Rule 1.2 *Rule 1.2(a) *Rule

More information

The Enforceability of Mediated Settlement Agreements. By: Thomas J. Smith The Law Offices of Thomas J. Smith San Antonio, Texas

The Enforceability of Mediated Settlement Agreements. By: Thomas J. Smith The Law Offices of Thomas J. Smith San Antonio, Texas The Enforceability of Mediated Settlement Agreements By: Thomas J. Smith The Law Offices of Thomas J. Smith San Antonio, Texas NIGHTMARE ON MEDIATION STREET You mediate a case where the Plaintiff is suing

More information

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

Fourteenth Court of Appeals Affirmed and Opinion filed April 12, 2001. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-99-00894-CR MYRNA DURON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 351st District Court Harris County,

More information

A Guide to Getting a Court Appointed Attorney When a Governmental Entity is Attempting to Terminate Your Parental Rights

A Guide to Getting a Court Appointed Attorney When a Governmental Entity is Attempting to Terminate Your Parental Rights A Guide to Getting a Court Appointed Attorney When a Governmental Entity is Attempting to Terminate Your Parental Rights Introduction If a governmental entity has brought a suit to terminate your parental

More information

Chapter 13 Procedure (Last Updated: May 13, 2013) Chapter 13.A Speedy Trial Chapter 13.B Recorded Interrogations

Chapter 13 Procedure (Last Updated: May 13, 2013) Chapter 13.A Speedy Trial Chapter 13.B Recorded Interrogations Chapter 13 Procedure (Last Updated: May 13, 2013) Chapter 13.A Speedy Trial Chapter 13.B Recorded Interrogations Chapter 13.A Procedure Speedy Trial (Last Updated: May 13, 2013) 29-1207. Trial within six

More information

Case 4:06-cv-00191 Document 12 Filed in TXSD on 05/25/06 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Case 4:06-cv-00191 Document 12 Filed in TXSD on 05/25/06 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION Case 4:06-cv-00191 Document 12 Filed in TXSD on 05/25/06 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION BARBARA S. QUINN, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-06-00191

More information

Title 15 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE -Chapter 23 ALABAMA CRIME VICTIMS Article 3 Crime Victims' Rights

Title 15 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE -Chapter 23 ALABAMA CRIME VICTIMS Article 3 Crime Victims' Rights Section 15-23-60 Definitions. As used in this article, the following words shall have the following meanings: (1) ACCUSED. A person who has been arrested for committing a criminal offense and who is held

More information

EXECUTIVE ORDER (Language Services in the Courts)

EXECUTIVE ORDER (Language Services in the Courts) SUPREME COURT No. 2012-05 EXECUTIVE ORDER (Language Services in the Courts) Pursuant to the authority granted to the Chief Justice of the Rhode Island Supreme Court by 8-15-2 of the Rhode Island General

More information

NO. 12-12-00183-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

NO. 12-12-00183-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS NO. 12-12-00183-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS IN RE: TRUCK INSURANCE EXCHANGE, ORIGINAL PROCEEDING RELATOR MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator Truck Insurance Exchange

More information

FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY OFFICE OF HEARING OFFICERS. Respondent.

FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY OFFICE OF HEARING OFFICERS. Respondent. FINANCIAL INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY OFFICE OF HEARING OFFICERS DEPARTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT, v. RESPONDENT, Complainant, Respondent. Disciplinary Proceeding No. 2011026874301 Hearing Officer Andrew H.

More information

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-13-00792-CV Richard LARES, Appellant v. Martha FLORES, Appellee From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court

More information

Privileges. Steven C. Laird. Tarrant County Bar Association CLE Cruise January, 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Privileges. Steven C. Laird. Tarrant County Bar Association CLE Cruise January, 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS Steven C. Laird Tarrant County Bar Association CLE Cruise January, 2002 Steven C. Laird LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN C. LAIRD, P.C. 2400 Scott Avenue Ft. Worth, Texas 76103 Telephone:(817) 531-3000 Facsimile:

More information

Guidelines for Guardians ad Litem for Children in Family Court

Guidelines for Guardians ad Litem for Children in Family Court Guidelines for Guardians ad Litem for Children in Family Court Preamble The following are guidelines for attorneys and non-lawyer volunteers appointed as guardians ad litem for children in most family

More information

STANDARD 3.5 ON ASSISTANCE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS

STANDARD 3.5 ON ASSISTANCE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS STANDARD 3.5 ON ASSISTANCE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS STANDARD In appropriate circumstances, a provider may offer pro se litigants assistance or limited representation at various stages of proceedings. COMMENTARY

More information

5/21/2010 A NEW OBLIGATION FOR CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS

5/21/2010 A NEW OBLIGATION FOR CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS A NEW OBLIGATION FOR CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS A practicing attorney for over 17 years, Jorge G. Aristotelidis is board certified in criminal law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, and is a former

More information

NOT ACTUAL PROTECTION: ACTUAL INNOCENCE STANDARD FOR CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS IN CALIFORNIA DOES NOT ELIMINATE ACTUAL LAWSUITS AND ACTUAL PAYMENTS

NOT ACTUAL PROTECTION: ACTUAL INNOCENCE STANDARD FOR CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS IN CALIFORNIA DOES NOT ELIMINATE ACTUAL LAWSUITS AND ACTUAL PAYMENTS NOT ACTUAL PROTECTION: ACTUAL INNOCENCE STANDARD FOR CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS IN CALIFORNIA DOES NOT ELIMINATE ACTUAL LAWSUITS AND ACTUAL PAYMENTS By Celeste King, JD and Barrett Breitung, JD* In 1998

More information

Ethical Considerations for the Estate Attorney. Trusts and Estates Practice is Difficult to Categorize

Ethical Considerations for the Estate Attorney. Trusts and Estates Practice is Difficult to Categorize Ethical Considerations for the Estate Attorney Trusts and Estates Practice is Difficult to Categorize Clients are generally older, but many younger people are planning for retirement and family members.

More information

Plaintiff, - v - Civ. No. 1:13-CV-1018 (MAD/RFT) COUNTY OF RENSSELAER, et al., DISCOVERY ORDER

Plaintiff, - v - Civ. No. 1:13-CV-1018 (MAD/RFT) COUNTY OF RENSSELAER, et al., DISCOVERY ORDER Case 1:13-cv-01018-MAD-DJS Document 76 Filed 02/10/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JAMES KARAM, Plaintiff, - v - Civ. No. 1:13-CV-1018 (MAD/RFT) COUNTY OF RENSSELAER,

More information

Texas Environmental, Health and Safety Audit Privilege Act

Texas Environmental, Health and Safety Audit Privilege Act Texas Environmental, Health and Safety Audit Privilege Act SCOTT D. DEATHERAGE PARTNER G A R D ERE WYNNE SEWELL, DALLAS S D EATHERAGE@GARDERE.COM Legislation Texas Environmental, Health and Safety Audit

More information

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-07-159-CV JACK WHITE APPELLANT V. GAIL WHITE APPELLEE ------------ FROM THE 90TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF YOUNG COUNTY ------------ MEMORANDUM

More information

MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION AND DRAFTING CONTINGENCY FEE AGREEMENTS

MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION AND DRAFTING CONTINGENCY FEE AGREEMENTS MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION AND DRAFTING CONTINGENCY FEE AGREEMENTS ADVANCED PERSONAL INJURY LAW COURSE CLE TEXAS STATE BAR 2013 S AM J OHNSON S COTT, DOUGLASS & MC C ONNICO, L.L.P. A TTORNEYS A T L AW WWW.

More information

The Ethical Challenges of Representing Organizations

The Ethical Challenges of Representing Organizations The Ethical Challenges of Representing Organizations Ross Fischer Denton, Navarro, Rocha & Bernal, P.C. 2500 W. William Cannon, Suite 609 Austin, Texas 78745 ross.fischer@rampage-aus.com Texas City Attorneys

More information

Eleventh Court of Appeals

Eleventh Court of Appeals Opinion filed March 14, 2014 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals No. 11-13-00119-CV BRENT BATES BUILDERS, INC. AND BRENT BATES, INDIVIDUALLY, Appellants V. RAHUL MALHOTRA, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A THE MALHOTRA

More information

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-13-00815-CV IN THE ESTATE OF Alvilda Mae AGUILAR From the Probate Court No. 2, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2012-PC-2802 Honorable

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 06-0258 444444444444 DENIS PROULX, PETITIONER v. MICHAEL A. WELLS, RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION FOR REVIEW

More information

The Fiduciary Exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege and Its Application in Litigation. by George O. Peterson

The Fiduciary Exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege and Its Application in Litigation. by George O. Peterson The Fiduciary Exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege and Its Application in Litigation by George O. Peterson I. INTRODUCTION Trusts and estates attorneys who represent fiduciaries may have little occasion

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-13-00055-CV Paula Villanueva, Appellant v. McCash Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Comet Cleaners and Comet Cleaners, Appellees FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT

More information

NC General Statutes - Chapter 15A Article 48 1

NC General Statutes - Chapter 15A Article 48 1 SUBCHAPTER IX. PRETRIAL PROCEDURE. Article 48. Discovery in the Superior Court. 15A-901. Application of Article. This Article applies to cases within the original jurisdiction of the superior court. (1973,

More information

General District Courts

General District Courts General District Courts To Understand Your Visit to Court You Should Know: It is the courts wish that you know your rights and duties. We want every person who comes here to receive fair treatment in accordance

More information

NOW COMES Defendant, Daniel W. Tuttle ( Mr. Tuttle ), by and through counsel, and

NOW COMES Defendant, Daniel W. Tuttle ( Mr. Tuttle ), by and through counsel, and NORTH CAROLINA DAVIDSON COUNTY IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION 06 CVS 948 AZALEA GARDEN BOARD & CARE, INC., Plaintiff, v. MEREDITH DODSON VANHOY, Personal Representative of the

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued April 19, 2016 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-15-00361-CV FREDDIE L. WALKER, Appellant V. RISSIE OWENS, PRESIDING OFFICER OF THE TEXAS BOARD OF PARDONS AND

More information

SENATE BILL 1486 AN ACT

SENATE BILL 1486 AN ACT Senate Engrossed State of Arizona Senate Forty-fifth Legislature First Regular Session 0 SENATE BILL AN ACT AMENDING SECTION -, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, AS AMENDED BY LAWS 00, CHAPTER, SECTION ; AMENDING

More information

PROPOSED MINIMUM STANDARDS SET 1 FOR DISTRIBUTION June 22, 2015

PROPOSED MINIMUM STANDARDS SET 1 FOR DISTRIBUTION June 22, 2015 PROPOSED MINIMUM STANDARDS SET 1 FOR DISTRIBUTION June 22, 2015 Introduction The statute creating the Michigan Indigent Defense Commission (MIDC) provides: The MIDC shall implement minimum standards, rules,

More information

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION Ethics Opinion KBA E-275 Issued: July 1983

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION Ethics Opinion KBA E-275 Issued: July 1983 KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION Ethics Opinion KBA E-275 Issued: July 1983 This opinion was decided under the Code of Professional Responsibility, which was in effect from 1971 to 1990. Lawyers should consult

More information

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS O P I N I O N

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS O P I N I O N COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS THE STATE OF TEXAS, v. JAVIER TERRAZAS, Appellant, Appellee. No. 08-12-00095-CR Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 7 of El Paso County, Texas

More information

ANSWERING THE CALL: RESPONDING TO A TEXAS CIVIL SUBPOENA

ANSWERING THE CALL: RESPONDING TO A TEXAS CIVIL SUBPOENA ANSWERING THE CALL: RESPONDING TO A TEXAS CIVIL SUBPOENA I. Introduction Your client has just received a subpoena from a Texas civil court in a case in which she is not a party. She calls you and inquires

More information

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-15-00223-CV In re The State of Texas ex rel. Jennifer A. Tharp ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM COMAL COUNTY M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N In this original

More information

REVERSE, RENDER, and REMAND; and Opinion Filed August 20, 2013. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No.

REVERSE, RENDER, and REMAND; and Opinion Filed August 20, 2013. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. REVERSE, RENDER, and REMAND; and Opinion Filed August 20, 2013. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-10-01614-CV W. DAVID HOLLIDAY, Appellant V. GREG WEAVER AND WENDY WEAVER,

More information

Corporate Counsel Beware: Limits Of 'No Contact Rule'

Corporate Counsel Beware: Limits Of 'No Contact Rule' Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Corporate Counsel Beware: Limits Of 'No Contact Rule'

More information

CAUSE NO. 05-11-00292-CV

CAUSE NO. 05-11-00292-CV CAUSE NO. 05-11-00292-CV IN THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS STEVEN L. SHILLING, Appellant v. KERRY PAIGE GOUGH, Appellee FILED IN COURT OF APPEALS FEB 1 4 2012 '\.. LISA MA TZ ClERK, 5th DISTRICT Appealed

More information

CHAPTER 6: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE MICHIGAN COURT RULES OF 1985

CHAPTER 6: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE MICHIGAN COURT RULES OF 1985 CHAPTER 6: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE MICHIGAN COURT RULES OF 1985 Subchapter 6.000 General Provisions Rule 6.001 Scope; Applicability of Civil Rules; Superseded Rules and Statutes (A) Felony Cases. The rules

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-13-01645-CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-13-01645-CV Reverse and Render; Opinion filed December 22, 2014. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-01645-CV THE COLLIN COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY S OFFICE, Appellant V. HAYDEN SELBY

More information

Opinion #177. Advancing Litigation Costs Through Lines of Credit

Opinion #177. Advancing Litigation Costs Through Lines of Credit Opinion #177. Advancing Litigation Costs Through Lines of Credit Issued by the Professional Ethics Commission Date Issued: December 14, 2001 Facts and Question An attorney has requested an opinion on whether

More information