Behunin v. Superior Court
| Docket Number | B272225 |
| Decision Date | 14 March 2017 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
18 cases
-
Golden Door Props., LLC v. Superior Court of San Diego Cnty.
...be made to advance their shared interest in securing legal advice on that common matter." ’ " ( Behunin v. Superior Court (2017) 9 Cal.App.5th 833, 853, 215 Cal.Rptr.3d 475.)When the common interest doctrine is asserted to prevent disclosure of shared information between a project applicant......
-
Ponzo v. Miller
...110 at p. 128.) Whether a party has waived the attorney-client privilege is often a mixed question of law and fact. (Behunin v. Superior Court (2017) 9 Cal.App.5th 833, 843.) Ponzo, Dillon and Ivy Screen argued in the trial court that the communications were admissible because Crum raised g......
-
Golden Door Props., LLC v. Superior Court
...the communications be made to advance their shared interest in securing legal advice on that common matter." ' " (Behunin v. Superior Court (2017) 9 Cal.App.5th 833, 853.) When the common interest doctrine is asserted to prevent disclosure of shared information between a project applicant a......
-
Golden Door Props., LLC v. Superior Court
...the communications be made to advance their shared interest in securing legal advice on that common matter." ' " (Behunin v. Superior Court (2017) 9 Cal.App.5th 833, 853.) When the common interest doctrine is asserted to prevent disclosure of shared information between a project applicant a......
Get Started for Free
4 firm's commentaries
-
Keeping PR Strategy Communications Privileged: Part 2
...is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice. [1] Behunin v. Superior Court, 215 Cal. Rptr. 3d 475 (Ct. App 2017). [2] Behunin, 215 Cal. Rptr. 3d, at 479. [3] Id., at 487. [4] Id., at 490-91 (citing cases). [5] Id., at 487-88., at ---......
-
Keeping the PR in Privilege: Outside Public Relations and the Attorney-Client Privilege
...& Paper Co., Ltd., 232 F.R.D. 103, 113 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). [View source.] S. Greg Burge M. Corban Snider Behunin v. Superior Court, 9 Cal.App.5th 833, 849 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017) (collecting [8] See, for example, In re Grand Jury Subpoenas Dated March 24, 2003, 265 F. Supp. 2d 321 (S.D.N.Y. 2......
-
Protecting Communications From PR Privilege Issues
...what to share with third parties. Endnotes 1 No. 1637-2015, 2017 Pa. Super. LEXIS 166 (Pa. Super. March 13, 2017). 2 9 Cal. App. 5th 833, *2, *36 n.11 (Cal. App. 2017) (declining to "address Behunin's passing reference to the attorney work product 3 These tests largely have been developed t......
-
Evaluating Stand-Alone Privilege for Cybersecurity Info
...with a public relations firm should remain privileged pursuant to what is known as the Kovel doctrine,9 the courts in Behunin v. Superior Court10 and BouSamra v. Excela Health11 said that the parties asserting privilege did not prove that disclosing the privileged documents was necessary fo......
7 books & journal articles
-
Table of Cases null
...Beck v. State of Ohio, 379 U.S. 89, 85 S. Ct. 223, 13 L. Ed. 2d 142 (1964)—Ch. 5-A, §2.2.3(1)(a) Behunin v. Superior Court, 9 Cal. App. 5th 833, 215 Cal. Rptr. 3d 475 (2d Dist. 2017)—Ch. 4-C, §4.2.2(2) Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685, 122 S. Ct. 1843, 152 L. Ed. 2d 914 (2002)—Ch. 5-D, §2.1.1 Bel......
-
Discovery
...(N.D. Ill. 2005)(same); Burton v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 200 F.R.D. 661, 669 (D. Kan. 2001). See also Behunin v. Superior Court , 9 Cal. App. 5th 833, 849-50, 215 Cal. Rptr. 3d 475 (2017) review denied (June 14, 2017)(“There may be situations in which an attorney’s use of a public relat......
-
Privileges and public policy exclusions
...necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose for which the attorney was consulted or retained. Behunin v. Superior Court (2017) 9 Cal. App. 5th 833, 846, 215 Cal. Rptr. 3d 475. Confidential attorney-client communications disclosed to a retained expert are privileged until the expert beco......
-
Table of cases
...§§9:130, 9:150, 9:160 Behr v. Redmond (2011) 193 Cal. App. 4th 517, 123 Cal. Rptr. 3d 97, §22:200 Behunin v. Superior Court (2017) 9 Cal. App. 5th 833, 215 Cal. Rptr. 3d 475, §10:70 Belcher, People v. (1961) 189 Cal. App. 2d 404, 11 Cal. Rptr. 175, §7:130 Belfiore-Braman v. Rotenberg (2018)......
Get Started for Free