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

attorneylawyersubpoenaappealtrialtax lawgrand juryattorney-client privilege
attorneylawyerappealtax lawattorney-client privilege

Related Cases

Keck and Associates, P.C. v. Vasey, 359 Ill.App.3d 566, 834 N.E.2d 486, 295 Ill.Dec. 905
View Case »
People v. Nash, 418 Mich. 196, 341 N.W.2d 439
View Case »
Dellwood Farms, Inc. v. Cargill, Inc., 128 F.3d 1122, 1997-2 Trade Cases P 71,962, 39 Fed.R.Serv.3d 188
View Case »
United States v. Gorski, 880 F.3d 27
View Case »
Disciplinary Counsel v. Riek, 125 Ohio St.3d 46, 925 N.E.2d 980, 2010 -Ohio- 1556
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

U.S. v. Kovel, 296 F.2d 918, 96 A.L.R.2d 116, 9 A.F.T.R.2d 366, 62-1 USTC P 9111

Facts

Kovel, a former Internal Revenue agent and accountant, was employed by a law firm specializing in tax law. He was subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury investigating alleged tax violations by a client of the firm. Kovel claimed privilege regarding communications from the client, but the Assistant United States Attorney argued that the privilege did not apply to non-lawyers. The trial judge ruled against Kovel, leading to his refusal to answer questions and subsequent contempt charges.

Kovel is a former Internal Revenue agent having accounting skills. Since 1943 he has been employed by Kamerman & Kamerman, a law firm specializing in tax law.

Issue

Does the attorney-client privilege extend to communications made by a client to an accountant employed by an attorney?

Decision under what circumstances, if any, the attorney-client privilege may include a communication to a nonlawyer by the lawyer's client is the resultant of two conflicting forces.

Rule

The attorney-client privilege can extend to communications made to non-lawyer employees of an attorney, including accountants, when those communications are made for the purpose of obtaining legal advice.

An attorney or counselor at law shall not disclose, or be allowed to disclose, a communication, made by his client to him, or his advice given thereon, in the course of his professional employment, nor shall any clerk, stenographer or other person employed by such attorney or counselor * * * disclose, or be allowed to disclose, any such communication or advice.

Analysis

The court analyzed the application of the attorney-client privilege in the context of Kovel's employment as an accountant by the law firm. It recognized that while the privilege traditionally applies to communications between a client and their attorney, it can also extend to communications with non-lawyer employees who assist in the provision of legal services. The court emphasized the necessity of such assistance in modern legal practice and the importance of maintaining confidentiality in communications made for legal advice.

The court analyzed the application of the attorney-client privilege in the context of Kovel's employment as an accountant by the law firm. It recognized that while the privilege traditionally applies to communications between a client and their attorney, it can also extend to communications with non-lawyer employees who assist in the provision of legal services.

Conclusion

The court vacated the judgment against Kovel and remanded the case for further proceedings to determine the specific circumstances under which the communications occurred and whether the privilege applied.

The judgment is vacated and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Who won?

Kovel prevailed in the appeal as the court recognized the potential applicability of the attorney-client privilege to his situation and remanded the case for further examination of the facts.

Kovel prevailed in the appeal as the court recognized the potential applicability of the attorney-client privilege to his situation and remanded the case for further examination of the facts.

You must be