(a)Except as otherwise provided in this section, the right of any person to claim a privilege provided by Section 954 (lawyer-client privilege), 966 (lawyer referral service-client privilege), 980 (privilege for confidential marital communications), 994 (physician-patient privilege), 1014 (psychotherapist-patient privilege), 1033 (privilege of penitent), 1034 (privilege of clergy member), 1035.8 (sexual assault counselor-victim privilege), 1037.5 (domestic violence counselor-victim privilege), or 1038 (human trafficking caseworker-victim privilege) is waived with respect to a communication protected by the privilege if any holder of the privilege, without coercion, has disclosed a significant part of the communication or has consented to disclosure made by anyone. Consent to disclosure is
manifested by any statement or other conduct of the holder of the privilege indicating consent to the disclosure, including failure to claim the privilege in any proceeding in which the holder has legal standing and the opportunity to claim the privilege.
(b)Where two or more persons are joint holders of a privilege provided by Section 954 (lawyer-client privilege), 966 (lawyer referral service-client privilege), 994 (physician-patient privilege), 1014 (psychotherapist-patient privilege), 1035.8 (sexual assault counselor-victim privilege), 1037.5 (domestic violence counselor-victim privilege), or 1038 (human trafficking caseworker-victim privilege), a waiver of the right of a particular joint holder of the privilege to claim the privilege does not affect the right of another joint holder to claim the privilege. In the case of the privilege provided by Section 980 (privilege for confidential marital communications), a waiver of the right of one
spouse to claim the privilege does not affect the right of the other spouse to claim the privilege.
(c)A disclosure that is itself privileged is not a waiver of any privilege.
(d)A disclosure in confidence of a communication that is protected by a privilege provided by Section 954 (lawyer-client privilege), 966 (lawyer referral service-client privilege), 994 (physician-patient privilege), 1014 (psychotherapist-patient privilege), 1035.8 (sexual assault counselor-victim privilege), 1037.5 (domestic violence counselor-victim privilege), or 1038 (human trafficking caseworker-victim privilege), when disclosure is reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose for which the lawyer, lawyer referral service, physician, psychotherapist, sexual assault counselor, domestic violence counselor, or human trafficking caseworker was consulted, is not a waiver of the
privilege.
Notes of Decisions
People v. Combs, 101 P.3d 1007 (Cal. 2004).
· cites it 4× “(Evid. Code, § 912; People v. Poulin (1972) 27 Cal.”
People v. Nieves, 485 P.3d 457 (Cal. 2021).
· cites it 2× “Code, §§ 1014, 1012.) Waiver of the privilege occurs when the holder of the privilege has disclosed a significant part of the communication or consented to disclosure.”
Oxy Resources California LLC v. Superior Court, 9 Cal. Rptr. 3d 621 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 4× “The statute regarding waiver of privileges, Evidence Code section 912, provides: “A disclosure in confidence of a communication that is protected by a privilege provided by Section 954 (lawyer-client privilege) .”
Ctr. v. Superior Court, 194 Cal. App. 4th 288 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 4× “(Evid. Code, § 912, subd. (a); Palay v. Superior Court (1993) 18 Cal.”
People v. Carasi, 190 P.3d 616 (Cal. 2008).
· cites it 2× “" (Evid. Code, § 912, subd. (a); see People v.”
People v. Barnett, 954 P.2d 384 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 2× “” (Evid. Code, § 912, subd. (a).) In this case, defendant did not claim the attorney-client privilege before giving testimony regarding the map and directions he gave to Eastham and Eastham’s failure to find the allegedly hidden methamphetamine oil.”
Kerner v. Superior Court, 206 Cal. App. 4th 84 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 3× “Consent to disclosure is manifested by any statement or other conduct of the holder of the privilege indicating consent to the disclosure, including failure to claim the privilege in any proceeding in which the holder has the legal standing and opportunity to claim the privilege.”
People v. Ledesma, 140 P.3d 657 (Cal. 2006).
“(Evid. Code, § 912, subd. (a).) Defendant asserted the privilege in the habeas corpus hearing, but the referee ruled that communications to Dr.”
People v. Barnett, 954 P.2d 384 (Cal. 1998).
· cites it 2× “" (Evid. Code, § 912, subd. (a).) In this case, defendant did not claim the attorney-client privilege before giving testimony regarding the map and directions he gave to Eastham and Eastham's failure to find the allegedly hidden methamphetamine oil.”
People v. Hayes, 989 P.2d 645 (Cal. 2000).
· cites it 2× “" (Evid.Code, § 912.) Appellant does not suggest, and the record does not reflect, notice to Garcia that defense counsel intended to subpoena her attorney.”
People v. Stritzinger, 668 P.2d 738 (Cal. 1983).
· cites it 2× “It may be argued that the requirement of awareness really reads subdivision (b) of section 11171 out of the Penal Code, since the solution is nothing but the concept of waiver applicable to all privileges (Evid. Code, § 912) in disguise. Not quite: the abrogation of the…”
— Cal. Evidence Code § 912(a) — 8 cases
— Cal. Evidence Code § 912(b) — 1 case
— Cal. Evidence Code § 912(d) — 6 cases
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.