Opinion

Scott v. Peterson

  • 126 P.3d 1232
  • 2005 OK 84
  • 2005 Okla. LEXIS 94
  • 2005 WL 3112022
Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Filed
Nov 22, 2005
Status
Published
Author
Taylor
On the bench
Edmondson, Taylor, Watt, Winchester, Lavender, Hargrave, Opala, Kauger, Colbert
Cited by
33 cases

“When only a part of a communication between attorney and client is privileged and if the privileged and unprivileged parts may be safely separated, then the privileged matter only will be excluded.”

How later courts described this case

  • “When only a part of a communication between attorney and client is privileged and if the privileged and unprivileged parts may be safely separated, then the privileged matter only will be excluded.”
  • “Generally, the mere status of an attorney-client relationship does not make every communication between attorney and client protected by the privilege.”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

¶ 30 TAYLOR, J.,

Dissents.

I would deny original jurisdiction. The trial judge was correct in the first instance and should be affirmed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.