The very term “attorney-client privilege” would seem to necessitate a lawyer’s involvement in any communications deserving that evidentiary protection. But in some critical intra-corporate situations, the protection covers communications between non-lawyers.
In Penemue, LLC v. Stevens, the court articulated the widely accepted principles that the privilege “protects communications between non-attorney employees in two circumstances: (1) when a corporate client shares information with non-attorney employees to relay information requested by attorneys; and (2) communications between non-attorney corporate employees seeking legal advice or sharing legal advice they received from counsel.” Civ. A. No. 22-5093 Section “P” (2), 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70214, at *8-9 (E.D. La. Apr. 14, 2025).
Corporate clients sometimes rely on these important principles to justify withholding communications described on a privilege log that catch the adversary’s attention because the log does not include a lawyer’s name in the sender or recipient field. Next week’s Privilege Point explains how the work product doctrine can also apply without a lawyer’s involvement.
