1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. MISC.LEGAL.MODERATED

  • Paul Drake, confidential PI

    From micky@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jun 13 21:39:23 2023
    I'm pretty sure when I watched Perry Mason that Paul Drake said he was
    covered by attorney-client privilege because he was working for Perry
    Mason and that he had the same privilege.

    But https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney%E2%80%93client_privilege#Crime%E2%80%93fraud_exception
    implies this would not apply to an accountant. If it does not apply to
    an accountant, how could it apply to a private detective?

    --
    I think you can tell, but just to be sure:
    I am not a lawyer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roy@21:1/5 to micky on Tue Jun 13 21:52:01 2023
    On 6/13/2023 9:39 PM, micky wrote:
    I'm pretty sure when I watched Perry Mason that Paul Drake said he was covered by attorney-client privilege because he was working for Perry
    Mason and that he had the same privilege.

    But https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney%E2%80%93client_privilege#Crime%E2%80%93fraud_exception
    implies this would not apply to an accountant. If it does not apply to
    an accountant, how could it apply to a private detective?


    In general the attorney client privilege extends to people working for
    the attorney. So Paul Drake worked for Perry and not the client.

    As an example, the client's accountant would not be covered but an
    accountant working for the attorney especially in the accountant was
    analyzing the client's account and helping prepare the defense

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Barry Gold@21:1/5 to micky on Tue Jun 13 22:51:48 2023
    On 6/13/2023 9:39 PM, micky wrote:
    I'm pretty sure when I watched Perry Mason that Paul Drake said he was covered by attorney-client privilege because he was working for Perry
    Mason and that he had the same privilege.

    But https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney%E2%80%93client_privilege#Crime%E2%80%93fraud_exception
    implies this would not apply to an accountant. If it does not apply to
    an accountant, how could it apply to a private detective?

    Whatever anybody does for the lawyer in the way of preparing the case, investigation, etc. is covered as "work product". If the accountant
    works directly for the client, there is no privilege. But if the
    accountant is hired by the lawyer to figure out the finances (e.g.,
    whether the client's accounting was "reasonable" even if it turned out
    to be wrong), then it is work product and privileged.

    --
    I do so have a memory. It's backed up on DVD... somewhere...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From micky@21:1/5 to Gold on Thu Jun 15 23:28:14 2023
    In misc.legal.moderated, on Tue, 13 Jun 2023 22:51:48 -0700 (PDT), Barry
    Gold <bgold@labcats.org> wrote:

    On 6/13/2023 9:39 PM, micky wrote:
    I'm pretty sure when I watched Perry Mason that Paul Drake said he was
    covered by attorney-client privilege because he was working for Perry
    Mason and that he had the same privilege.

    But
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney%E2%80%93client_privilege#Crime%E2%80%93fraud_exception

    It was several paragraphs Further on down.

    implies this would not apply to an accountant. If it does not apply to
    an accountant, how could it apply to a private detective?

    Whatever anybody does for the lawyer in the way of preparing the case, >investigation, etc. is covered as "work product". If the accountant
    works directly for the client, there is no privilege. But if the
    accountant is hired by the lawyer to figure out the finances (e.g.,
    whether the client's accounting was "reasonable" even if it turned out
    to be wrong), then it is work product and privileged.

    Thanks to both of you. The wikip didn't quite say what I thought it
    said. it was talking about a lawyer/accountant who for a particular
    client only did accounting work, no legal work, and therefore wasn't
    covered by the privelege. Not an accountant working for a lawyer.

    --
    I think you can tell, but just to be sure:
    I am not a lawyer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)