United States legal advice privilege

In re Grand Jury (attorney-client privilege)

598 U.S. 24 (2023)

JurisdictionUnited States

CourtUS Supreme Court

Year2023

Statusunclear

Summary

SCOTUS dismissed as improvidently granted, leaving unresolved the standard for attorney-client privilege in dual-purpose communications.

Key Principle

dismissed as improvidently granted; attorney-client privilege for dual-purpose communications unresolved

Area of Law

evidence

Related Cases

Warden v Bailey (2020) 103 NSWLR 207

IMM v The Queen (2016) 257 CLR 300

Under UEA s 97, tendency evidence in sexual offence cases requires significant probative value but no striking similarity between the tendency and charged acts.

Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar (2011) 243 CLR 588

Expert opinion evidence is admissible only if based on specialised knowledge, and the expert must identify the facts and reasoning underlying the opinion.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of In re Grand Jury (attorney-client privilege) and how it applies to your situation.

Explain In re Grand Jury (attorney-cli...