Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

attorneyappealhearingtrialdivorcedue processappellantattorney-client privilege
attorneyappealtrialdivorceappellantattorney-client privilege

Related Cases

Haines v. Liggett Group Inc., 975 F.2d 81, 61 USLW 2148, 36 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 782
View Case »
Finley v. Superior Court, 95 Cal.App.5th 12, 312 Cal.Rptr.3d 907, 23 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8800, 2023 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9104
View Case »
Sliech-Brodeur v. Com., 447 Mass. 1004, 849 N.E.2d 806
View Case »
Rosner v. Jiro Trading Corp., Not Reported in F.Supp., 1996 WL 312354
View Case »
In re Hall County Grand Jury Proceedings, 175 Ga.App. 349, 333 S.E.2d 389
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Dike v. Dike, 75 Wash.2d 1, 448 P.2d 490

Facts

The appellant, an attorney for Robbin Angela Dike in a divorce action, was ordered to disclose his client's whereabouts after she violated a temporary custody order. After failing to appear at a contempt hearing, the court ordered the attorney to produce his client or show cause for her absence. The attorney refused to disclose the information, citing attorney-client privilege, and was subsequently held in contempt and jailed. The contempt order was later purged after the client appeared in court.

The appellant, an attorney for Robbin Angela Dike in a divorce action, was ordered to disclose his client's whereabouts after she violated a temporary custody order.

Issue

Did the trial court err in holding the attorney in contempt for refusing to disclose his client's whereabouts, given the attorney-client privilege?

Did the trial court err in holding the attorney in contempt for refusing to disclose his client's whereabouts, given the attorney-client privilege?

Rule

An attorney has a duty to maintain client confidentiality, but this duty may be overridden by the court's need to protect the welfare of a child in custody disputes.

An attorney has a duty to maintain client confidentiality, but this duty may be overridden by the court's need to protect the welfare of a child in custody disputes.

Analysis

The court analyzed the balance between the attorney's duty to maintain client confidentiality and the court's obligation to protect the welfare of the child. It concluded that the attorney's refusal to disclose his client's whereabouts hindered the court's ability to enforce its custody order, thus constituting contempt unless the information was indeed privileged. The court ultimately found that the attorney's belief in the privilege was not sufficient to justify his refusal to comply with the court's order.

The court analyzed the balance between the attorney's duty to maintain client confidentiality and the court's obligation to protect the welfare of the child. It concluded that the attorney's refusal to disclose his client's whereabouts hindered the court's ability to enforce its custody order, thus constituting contempt unless the information was indeed privileged.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court vacated the contempt order against the attorney, stating that he should have been given the opportunity for appellate review before being punished. The court emphasized the need for attorneys to be able to assert their rights without fear of immediate imprisonment.

The Supreme Court vacated the contempt order against the attorney, stating that he should have been given the opportunity for appellate review before being punished.

Who won?

The attorney prevailed in the appeal as the court vacated the contempt order against him, recognizing the need for due process before imposing such a penalty.

The attorney prevailed in the appeal as the court vacated the contempt order against him.

You must be