A_News_Junkie
Retired
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2009
- Messages
- 5,651
- Reaction score
- 32
I'm confused about this... why would it be ok and not a violation of atty/client privilege for BC to talk about the CA/GA letter to MN that JB went behind BC's back to get? And if for whatever reason, this revelation did not break ACP, what might the other revelations entail if they WOULD violate ACP?
Will we ever find out? Should this post be in the Lawyers' thread? Is everyone else as kerflunkeled as I am?
I think this would be great in the attorney thread!
My guess, is because he was bypassed and the letter was never a letter with his representation he would have NO attorney client obligation at all.
Also interesting is toward the end, BC wants to tell them more, but hesitates and ponders A/C privilege -- my hunch is if he checks the legal position and it is favorable to him speaking, there might be lots more!
If you take this over, also ask if at a bar review - does attorney client privilege exist!