Macheca v. Bohn

503 So. 2d 467, 1987 La. LEXIS 8809
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedMarch 20, 1987
DocketNo. 87-CC-0211
StatusPublished

This text of 503 So. 2d 467 (Macheca v. Bohn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Macheca v. Bohn, 503 So. 2d 467, 1987 La. LEXIS 8809 (La. 1987).

Opinion

In re Macheca, Kathleen; applying for supervisory writs; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “H”, No. 276-204; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 86-C-763.

Writ granted. Judgments of the lower courts reversed. Communications and information received by an attorney while jointly representing a married couple is not subject to an attorney/client privilege urged by either spouse (against the other) or by the attorney. Cf. Hodges v. Southern Farm Bureau, 433 So.2d 125 (La.1983) (where attorney had represented both insurer and insured, insured could discover attorney’s correspondence in subsequent [468]*468suit by insured against insurer). The trial judge is ordered to grant an appropriate order compelling discovery.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Hodges v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co.
433 So. 2d 125 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
503 So. 2d 467, 1987 La. LEXIS 8809, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/macheca-v-bohn-la-1987.