(a) As used in this section:
(1) “Authorized representative” means an individual empowered by a public agency to assert the confidentiality of communications that are privileged under this section;
(2) “Confidential communications” means all oral and written communications transmitted in confidence between a public official or employee of a public agency acting in the performance of his or her duties or within the scope of his or her employment and a government attorney relating to legal advice sought by the public agency or a public official or employee of such public agency from that attorney, and all records prepared by the government attorney in furtherance of the rendition of such legal advice;
(3) “Government attorney” means a person admitted to the bar of this state and employed by a public agency or retained by a public agency or public official to provide legal advice to the public agency or a public official or employee of such public agency; and
(4) “Public agency” means “public agency” as defined in section 1-200.
(b) In any civil or criminal case or proceeding or in any legislative or administrative proceeding, all confidential communications shall be privileged and a government attorney shall not disclose any such communications unless an authorized representative of the public agency consents to waive the privilege and allow such disclosure.
(P.A. 99-179, S. 1.)
Section, even if applied retroactively, would not affect the legal standard applied in deciding that certain invoices were not protected by attorney-client privilege. 260 C. 143. “Confidential communications” are those where the attorney is acting in a professional capacity for the agency, the communications are made to the attorney by current employees or officials of the agency, the communications relate to the legal advice sought by the agency from the attorney, and the communications are made in confidence. 300 C. 511.
Notes of Decisions
Maxwell v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, 794 A.2d 535 (Conn. 2002).
· cites it 24× “This appeal presents two issues for our consideration, namely, whether (1) retroactive application of General Statutes § 52-146r, 1 which prevents disclosure of confidential communications between a government attorney and its agency client, would prevent the disclosure of…”
Lash v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, 14 A.3d 998 (Conn. 2011).
· cites it 6× “As the Appellate Court explained, the question of whether the attorney-client privilege applies to the documents is governed by General Statutes § 1-210 (b) (10), 5 as interpreted by this court in Shew v.”
In re Thirty-third Statewide Investigating Grand Jury, 86 A.3d 204 (Pa. 2014).
“The Connecticut legislature has enacted a statute specifically providing that "[i]n any civil or criminal case or proceeding or in any legislative or administrative proceeding, all confidential communications shall be privileged and a government attorney shall not disclose any…”
Lash v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, 976 A.2d 739 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009).
· cites it 4× “Section 1-210 (b) (10) provides, inter alia, that documents exempted by state statute or protected by the attorney-client privilege are exempt from disclosure under the act.”
Avon v. Sastre, 224 Conn. App. 155 (Conn. App. Ct. 2024).
· cites it 6× “8 The legislature subsequently codified the common-law attorney-client privilege in General Statutes § 52-146r, which, in subsection (b), provides that ‘‘[i]n any civil or criminal case or proceeding or in any legislative or administrative proceeding, all confidential…”
Giuliano v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n (Conn. App. Ct. 2022).
· cites it 2× “’’ 5 General Statutes § 1-210 (b) provides in relevant part: ‘‘Nothing in the Freedom of Information Act shall be construed to require disclosure of .”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-146r(b) — 2 cases
In re Thirty-third Statewide Investigating Grand Jury, 86 A.3d 204 (Pa. 2014).
“The Connecticut legislature has enacted a statute specifically providing that "[i]n any civil or criminal case or proceeding or in any legislative or administrative proceeding, all confidential communications shall be privileged and a government attorney shall not disclose any…”
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.