Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

Inadvertent Disclosures: CA Supreme Court Establishes Duties of Attorneys, But Issues Remain

In <i>Rico v. Mitsubishi Motors Corp.</i>, the California Supreme Court adopted the 'fair and reasonable approach' originally formulated by the Second District Court of Appeal in <i>State Compensation Ins. Fund v. WPS, Inc.</i>, and set forth the duties of attorneys upon receiving inadvertent disclosures.

13 minute read April 29, 2008 at 11:41 AM
By
Douglas W. Lytle
Inadvertent Disclosures: CA Supreme Court Establishes Duties of Attorneys, But Issues Remain

An attorney's receipt of apparently privileged materials during litigation presents a conundrum. Was the disclosure purposeful or inadvertent? May the lawyer assume the privilege was waived? What are the recipient lawyer's duties?

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

The Copyright Royalty Board (CRB), which works under the umbrella of the Librarian of Congress, sets statutory-license royalty terms and rates. The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently issued two notable decisions about the CRB.

October 01, 2026