§ 7.3.6.3.8 Privilege Issues.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 7.3.6.3.8 Privilege Issues. There are numerous special actions that involved the assertion of a privilege. In Accomazzo v. Kemp , 234 Ariz. 169, 319 P.3d 231 (App. 2014), for example, the court of appeals accepted special-action jurisdiction to address important questions regarding the circumstances in which the attorney-client privilege may be deemed waived. The respondent judge had agreed with the husband in the underlying divorce proceeding in which the validity of a pre-nuptial agreement was at issue, that by challenging the validity of that agreement, the wife had waived the attorney-client privilege as to the attorney who had represented her in connection with that agreement. The judge ruled that the attorney could be deposed and compelled to testify at trial about any information relating the representation. The court of appeals accepted jurisdiction because the wife did not have an equally plain, speedy and adequate remedy by appeal; it disagreed with the respondent and held that the wife had not placed privileged information at issue and waived the privilege simply by challenging the agreement, nor had she waived the privilege by having her parents with her during the consultation. Additionally, the court concluded that counsel’s impressions were protected by the work-product doctrine.

In another case involving privilege, the court of appeals accepted jurisdiction in Johnson v. O’Connor, 235 Ariz. 85, 327 P.3d 218 (App. 2014), to address the question whether an Arizona court could issue a summons under the Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses From Without a State in Criminal Proceedings, A.R.S. §§ 13-4091 to 13-4096, and require the...