Did Lindsay Lohan Attorney Breach Confidentiality?

Brett Emison
Attorney
(866) 735-1102 Ext 461
Visit Brett Emison on FacebookVisit Brett Emison on LinkedInVisit Brett Emison on TwitterVisit Brett Emison on AvvoVisit Brett Emison on Google+
Posted by Brett EmisonJuly 12, 2010 6:04 PM

Ok. Here is something I didn't plan on writing about when I woke up this morning... a blog post about Lindsay Lohan with People Magazine as my source!

Here's why Lindsay Lohan made this blog: One of her criminal defense attorneys may have violated confidentiality rules in speaking to the press about his meeting with Lindsay and her camp.

Attorneys are governed strict ethical rules contained within the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Rule 1.6 governs confidentiality of information and states:

(a) A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent, the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation or the disclosure is permitted by paragraph (b).

According to People, this criminal defense lawyer met with Lohan, her mother Dina and younger sister Ali for at least six hours. During the meeting, which occurred at Lohan's apartment, the lawyer outlined his requirements for representing Lohan, but ultimately declined to take Lohan's case.

Now, this lawyer has given interviews to news media, including the following information from his attorney-client meeting with Lohan:

  • "My impression of Lindsay is that she's a fragile lost child...."
  • "I'm concerned that [Lohan's] not disciplined enough to the reality of adult consequences."
  • "... they didn't seem to understand the urgency and gravity of the situation."
  • Lohan took notes during their six hour meeting.

An attorney-client relationship can be established even though the attorney is not ultimately retained. Bennet Silvershein Associates v. Furman, 776 F.Supp. 800, 803 (S.D.N.Y. 1991). The attorney-client relationship is established when the client believes that she is consulting a lawyer in his professional capacity and manifests her intention to seek professional legal advice. Griffen by Freeland v. East Prairie Missouri Reorganized School District No. 2, 945 F.Supp. 1251 (E.D. Mo. 1996). An attorney-client relationship is not dependent on a formal contract or payment of fees.

The attorney-client privilege must be protected by the attorney and held inviolate. In other words, an attorney is ethically bound to keep confidential the information disclosed in conversations with his client.

Why then was this attorney divulging confidential information to People magazine? Perhaps, he concluded that since others (Lohan's mother and sister) were present, the attorney-client privilege did not attach. Privileges can be waived when the disclosure is knowingly made with third-parties present, even if the client is communicating to her lawyer.

Regardless, unless Lohan gave her explicit (written) permission for this attorney to discuss their meeting in the press, this information should have remained confidential.

Update:

Read more: Confidential Means Confidential, Even In Lindsay Lohan Case (Stuart Goldbert, Esq. -- Fail) [by Eric Turkewitz at New York Personal Injury Law Blog]

1 Comment

Have an opinion about this post? Please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Barn Door
Posted by Barn Door
July 14, 2010 10:46 PM

Attorney-client privilege is not interchangeable with an attorney's ethical duty of confidentiality. While the presence of a third party may impact Ms. Lohan's ability to keep her conversation with her attorney out of court under the rules of evidence, an attorney's ethical duty of confidentiality is much broader.

ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.18 is clear that "even when no client-lawyer relationship ensues, a lawyer who has had discussions with a prospective client shall not use or reveal information learned in the consultation, except as Rule 1.9 would permit with respect to information of a former client." Note that neither 1.18 nor 1.6 contain a third party exception.

In other words, even if Mr. Goldberg could theoretically be hauled into court to testify to their conversation, he still can't blab about a client's conversation to People magazine.

Comments for this article are closed. You may still contact the author directly by email.

Subscribe to The Legal Examiner Kansas City

The Legal Examiner Kansas City RSS Feeds

Keep up with the latest updates using your favorite RSS reader

The Legal Examiner Kansas City is brought to you by Langdon & Emison

Legal Assistance Center

More Info
Langdon & Emison (800) 397-4910 www.langdonemison.com
google
Personal Injury Lawyers Serving: Langdon & Emison tries cases across the country from offices in St. Louis and near Kansas City. Greater Kansas City areas include Kansas City, Independence, Lee's Summit, Blue Springs, Raytown, Gladstone, Liberty, Grandview, Belton, Sedalia, Warrensburg, Marshall, Raymore, Excelsior Springs.
911 Main StP.O. Box 220, Lexington, Missouri 64067 [ Show Map ]1828 Swift AveSuite 333, North Kansas City, Missouri 64116 [ Show Map ]110 East Lockwood, St. Louis, Missouri 63119 [ Show Map ]
Confidential

Your question will be referred to an attorney near you. If your question is of a legal nature, then by submitting this form you agree you are not forming a formal attorney / client relationship. Read our full privacy policy.

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Enter your email address if you would like to receive email notifications when comments are made on this post.

Email address