Legal Opinion
In Re Grand Jury Proceedings. Appeal of the Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 27, 1996No. 96-55344PublishedCited by 72 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RYMER, Circuit Judge:
We must decide whether communications between an attorney and client can be “in furtherance of’ criminal activity, as they must be to fall within the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege, even if the attorney is unaware of the crimes and takes no affirmative step that actually furthers them.
Corporation appeals the district court’s order requiring its two former corporate counsel, Mary Roe and John Doe, to appear before a federal grand jury to answer questions about confidential communications they had with corporate personnel regarding the employment…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. ZolinSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated September 15, 1983 Marc Rich & Co. A.G., Intervenor-Appellant v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
- In Re MurphyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1977
- United States v. Aleksandrs v. LaurinsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- United States v. Maurice H. Friedman, United States of America v. Manuel JacobsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by72 opinions
- United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Curtis R. Martin, Jr., Defendant-Appellant-Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tei Fu CHEN; The Sunrider Corporation, Defendants-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- United States v. BauerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Olson v. Accessory Controls & Equipment Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- In Re: Grand Jury v.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2012
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.