New Federal Rule of Evidence 502 Deals With Attorney-Client Privilege, Waiver, And Inadvertent Production

There's going to be a new Federal Rule of Evidence, approved by voice vote in the House this week and unanimously by the Senate earlier this year.  It's on President Bush's desk for signature (that's him signing the baseball in the picture at the left), and should be on the books in the next few weeks.  

The new addition to the Rules is Rule 502, titled "Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product: Limitations on Waiver."  New Rule 502 covers the scope of a waiver of privilege and the issue of inadvertent production of privileged documents, among other waiver related issues. 

The full text of the Rule is at the bottom, but here's a synopsis:

  • If a waiver of privilege is found, the waiver extends to undisclosed communications or information only if (1) the waiver is intentional,  (2) the other communications involve the same subject matter, and (3) the communications "ought in fairness to be considered together."  Rule 502(a).
  • If the disclosure is inadvertent, it does not operate as a waiver in either federal or state court if (1) the disclosure was inadvertent, (2) the holder of the privilege took "reasonable steps to prevent disclosure," and (3) the holder "promptly took reasonable steps to rectify the error."  Rule 502(b)
  • If the disclosure was made in a state court proceeding, it doesn't operate as a waiver in a federal proceeding if either the disclosure wouldn't have been a waiver under the federal rule, or it wouldn't be a waiver under state law. Rule 502(c).
  • If the Court enters an Order (like a consent Protective Order) that a disclosure will not be a waiver, that Order will bar any determination by another federal court or a state court that a waiver has occurred.  In other words, such a judicially approved non-waiver provision will have effect beyond the pending litigation, which isn't the case now.  Since parties can provide by such an agreement that, for example, there will be no waiver irrespective of the care taken by the disclosing party, no-waiver provisions will no doubt become stock provisions in Protective Orders. An agreement between the parties on waiver issues won't be effective unless it becomes part of a Court Order.  Rule 502(d) and (e).

The new Rule resolves conflict between courts throughout the country on whether an inadvertent production results in waiver.  North Carolina's District Courts had reached different conclusions on that issue.  Scott v. Glickman, 199 F.R.D. 174 (E.D.N.C. 2001) and Parkway Gallery v. Kittinger/Pennsylvania H. Group, 116 F.R.D. 46 (M.D.N.C.1987) followed the flexible approach espoused by the new Rule, but the Western District had held that even an inadvertent production waived privilege, in Thomas v. Pansy Ellen Products, Inc., 672 F. Supp. 237 (W.D.N.C. 1987).

The Rule takes effect immediately upon the President's signature.  It applies to all cases filed after its enactment, and applies to pending cases "insofar as is just and practicable."

I read about Congress' passage of the Rule on the Electronic Discovery Law blog. The full text of the Rule is below, the explanatory note is here.

 

Rule 502. Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product; Limitations on Waiver

                                                                                                   

The following provisions apply, in the circumstances set out, to disclosure of a communication or information covered by the attorney-client privilege or work-product protection.

 

(a)            Disclosure made in a federal proceeding or to a federal office or agency; scope of a waiver. When the disclosure is made in a federal proceeding or to a federal office or agency and waives the attorney-client privilege or work-product protection, the waiver extends to an undisclosed communication or information in a federal or state proceeding only if:

(1)            the waiver is intentional;

(2)            the disclosed and undisclosed communications or informa­tion concern the same subject matter; and

(3)            they ought in fairness to be considered together.

(b)            Inadvertent disclosure. When made in a federal proceeding or to a federal office or agency, the disclosure does not operate as a waiver in a federal or state proceeding if:

(1)            the disclosure is inadvertent;

(2)            the holder of the privilege or protection took reasonable steps to prevent disclosure; and

(3)            the holder promptly took reasonable steps to rectify the error, including (if applicable) following Fed. R. 25 Civ. P. 26(b)(5)(B).

(c)             Disclosure made in a state proceeding. — When the disclosure is made in a state proceeding and is not the subject of a state-court order concerning waiver, the disclosure does not operate as a waiver in a federal proceeding if the disclosure:

(1)            would not be a waiver under this rule if it had been made in a federal proceeding; or

(2)            is not a waiver under the law of the state where the disclosure occurred.

(d)            Controlling effect of a court order. — A federal court may order that the privilege or protection is not waived by disclosure connected with the litigation pending before the court – in which event the disclosure is also not a waiver in any other federal or state proceeding.

(e)             Controlling effect of a party agreement. — An agreement on the effect of disclosure in a federal proceeding is binding only on the parties to the agreement, unless it is incorporated into a court order.

(f)             Controlling effect of this rule. — Notwithstanding            Rules 101 and 1101, this rule applies to state proceedings and to federal court-annexed and federal court-mandated arbitration proceedings, in the circumstances set out in the rule. And notwithstanding Rule 501, this rule applies even if state law provides the rule of decision.

(g)            Definitions. — In this rule:

(1)            “attorney-client privilege” means the protection that applicable law provides for confidential attorney-client communications; and

(2)            “work-product protection” means the protection that applicable law provides for tangible material (or its intangible equivalent) prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial.

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.ncbusinesslitigationreport.com/admin/trackback/86504
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?
Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.