holding that bank president’s handwritten notes taken during a meeting with counsel reflected confidential communications with counsel and fell within the scope of the privilege
How later courts described this case
- holding that bank president’s handwritten notes taken during a meeting with counsel reflected confidential communications with counsel and fell within the scope of the privilege
- recognizing privilege's purpose is to create atmosphere encouraging confidence and dialogue between attorney and client, and intended beneficiary is not client so much as administration of justice
- attorney-client privilege does not protect communications made for purpose or in course of commission of proposed crime or fraud
- affirming disqualification of lawyer who represents target and non-target witnesses with “potentially conflicting interests” in grand jury investigation
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
McDERMOTT, Justice,
dissenting.
I agree with the majority’s holdings regarding the propriety of the trial court’s orders on immunity and counsel *448 disqualification. I disagree, however, with the majority’s treatment of the disputed handwritten notes. I do not quarrel that one’s confidences by and between their attorney are privileged. If, however, their communication, reduced to writing, is left for others to see, it cannot be shielded from a legally posited search.