California Statutes
§ 917. — 917. (Amended by Stats. 2016, Ch. 50, Sec. 33.)
California § 917.
JurisdictionCalifornia
Code EVIDEvidence Code - EVID
Div. 8.DIVISION 8. PRIVILEGES
Ch. 3.CHAPTER 3. General Provisions Relating to Privileges
This text of California § 917. (917. (Amended by Stats. 2016, Ch. 50, Sec. 33.)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Cal. Evidence Code - EVID Code § 917. (2026).
Text
(a)If a privilege is claimed on the ground that the matter sought to be disclosed is a communication made in confidence in the course of the lawyer-client, lawyer referral service-client, physician-patient, psychotherapist-patient, clergy-penitent, marital or domestic partnership, sexual assault counselor-victim, domestic violence counselor-victim, or human trafficking caseworker-victim relationship, the communication is presumed to have been made in confidence and the opponent of the claim of privilege has the burden of proof to establish that the communication was not confidential.
(b)A communication between persons in a relationship listed in subdivision (a) does not lose its privileged character for the sole reason that
it is communicated by electronic means or because persons
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
United States v. Maurice H. Friedman, United States of America v. Manuel Jacobs
445 F.2d 1076 (Ninth Circuit, 1971)
Kandel v. Brother International Corp.
683 F. Supp. 2d 1076 (C.D. California, 2010)
Taxel v. Equity General Insurance (In Re Couch)
80 B.R. 512 (S.D. California, 1987)
Continental Casualty Co. v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance
265 F.R.D. 510 (E.D. California, 2010)
Great American Surplus Lines Insurance v. Ace Oil Co.
120 F.R.D. 533 (E.D. California, 1988)
Tam v. Qualcomm, Inc.
300 F. Supp. 3d 1130 (S.D. California, 2018)
Sony Computer Entertainment America, Inc. v. Great American Insurance
229 F.R.D. 632 (N.D. California, 2005)
Kristopher C. Edwards v. A. Lamarque, Warden
439 F.3d 504 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)
Bozzuto v. Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
255 F.R.D. 673 (C.D. California, 2009)
ACTION PERFORMANCE COMPANIES, INC. v. Bohbot
420 F. Supp. 2d 1115 (C.D. California, 2006)
Andrew Barton v. United States District Court For The Central District Of California
410 F.3d 1104 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)
Barton v. United States District Court for the Central District of California
410 F.3d 1104 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)
Kranz & Associates Holdings, LLC v. Lain
(N.D. California, 2024)
SM 10000 Property, LLC v. Allianz Global Risks US Insurance Company
(N.D. California, 2020)
Skanska USA Civil West California District Inc. v. National Interstate Insurance Company
(S.D. California, 2021)
Gawel v. Radius Health, Inc.
(S.D. California, 2021)
Leung v. UNUM Life Insurance Company of America
(S.D. California, 2023)
United States v. Nicholas
606 F. Supp. 2d 1109 (C.D. California, 2009)
Jae Properties, Inc. v. Amtax Holdings 2001-XX, LLC.
(S.D. California, 2020)
Outlaw Laboratory, LP v. DG in PB, LLC
(S.D. California, 2020)
Legislative History
Amended by Stats. 2016, Ch. 50, Sec. 33. (SB 1005) Effective January 1, 2017.
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
California § 917., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ca/EVID/917..