Texas Supreme Court tackles attorney-client privilege

Want to keep what you and your lawyer talk about regarding workplace issues confidential? I thought so. The Texas Supreme Court will soon be deciding an important case to help you keep these conversations secret. While it arose in an unusual context, the rule to be announced will be broad-based and widely applicable.

UT-Austin hires an investigator
The admissions system at University of Texas at Austin came under attack for inappropriate actions. The lawyers for UT-Austin decided to hire an investigator to conduct a factual investigation. This is common in such situations: The third party ideally investigates the allegations and prepares a report for the lawyers, who then give legal advice to the client.

By way of example, we see this arrangement in cases involving sexual harassment allegations or executive fraud claims. And, not unnaturally, the hiring of the investigator was reduced to an engagement letter.

The report was prepared and given to UT-Austin with suggestions to change parts of the admissions process. It was released to the public.

Under Texas law, a public interest organization sought both the documents that UT-Austin gave the investigator, as well as the transcripts of investigator interviews. The school adamantly refused citing the attorney-client privilege, but the Austin Court of Appeals disagreed and ordered production of the documents.