US v. Ruehle: An Example of the Frailty of California’s Presumption of Attorney-Client Confidentiality

Irvine partners Scott Garner and  Isabelle Carrillo co-authored “US v. Ruehle,” which was published in the December 2009 issue of the Orange County Lawyer.

“The recent decision in US v. Ruehle is a reminder that federal common law, and not California law, determines whether, in federal question cases, a communication between a lawyer and his client is protected as privilege. Because California takes a more client-friendly view of confidentiality—presuming that communications made in the course of the attorney-client relationship are confidential—while federal common law takes a stricter view that places the burden on the client of proving a communication was confidential, whether federal law or California Law is applied can be critical to the determination of whether a communication is covered by the privilege or not.”