1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Understanding the Nuances of the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine: Los Angeles Federal Bar Association

Understanding the Nuances of the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine: Los Angeles Federal Bar Association

Event | 05.09.24, 6:00 PM PDT | CLE Offered

Agustin Orozco will be moderating a panel on Understanding the Nuances of the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine alongside panelists HONORABLE PATRICIA DONAHUE, 
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE; LINDSEY GREER DOTSON, ASST. U.S. ATTORNEY, CHIEF, PUBLIC CORRUPTION & CIVIL RIGHTS SECTION; and CAROLYN SMALL, SPECIAL COUNSEL (JENNER & BLOCK) 

The attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine stand as fundamental cornerstones in civil and criminal matters, safeguarding the confidentiality of communications between lawyers and their clients. These principles, however, present a labyrinth of legal, ethical, and practical challenges for both legal practitioners and their clients to navigate. Our panel discussion explores the multifaceted dimensions of the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine, focusing on their critical roles, limitations, and strategic implications. Panelists will also discuss how the privilege and doctrine apply in various scenarios, including in the joint defense context and when dealing with third parties--such as external auditors. Food and drinks will be provided, with a reception prior to the discussion.

MCLE: 1 Hr. General MCLE This activity has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education Credit by the State Bar of California. The FBA certifies that this activity conforms to the standards of approved education activities prescribed by the rules and regulations of the State Bar of California governing minimum continuing legal education.

For more information, please visit these areas: White Collar and Regulatory Enforcement

Participants

Insights

Event | 02.20.25

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today: In 1997, the California Supreme Court decided Buss v. Superior Court. In Buss, the court concluded that a liability insurer that defended a mixed action could seek reimbursement from the insured for the defense costs associated with the claims that were not even potentially covered. Since then, numerous courts have held that insurers are entitled to recoup their defense costs associated with uncovered claims or causes of action. On the other hand, a significant number of courts have rejected insurers’ right to recoupment, at least in the absence of a policy provision granting the insurer that right. Some commentators have even suggested that the current judicial trend might be away from permitting insurers to recoup their defense costs. Is that correct? Has the Buss stopped? This panel of coverage experts will analyze insurers’ claimed right to recoupment today, and offer their perspectives on what the law on recoupment should perhaps be and might be in the future.

View All Insights