Florida Statute 90.502 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title VII
EVIDENCE

Chapter 90
EVIDENCE CODE

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 90.502

90.502 Lawyer-client privilege.—

(1) For purposes of this section:

(a) A “lawyer” is a person authorized, or reasonably believed by the client to be authorized, to practice law in any state or nation.

(b) A “client” is any person, public officer, corporation, association, or other organization or entity, either public or private, who consults a lawyer with the purpose of obtaining legal services or who is rendered legal services by a lawyer.

(c) A communication between lawyer and client is “confidential” if it is not intended to be disclosed to third persons other than:

1. Those to whom disclosure is in furtherance of the rendition of legal services to the client.

2. Those reasonably necessary for the transmission of the communication.

(2) A client has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent any other person from disclosing, the contents of confidential communications when such other person learned of the communications because they were made in the rendition of legal services to the client.

(3) The privilege may be claimed by:

(a) The client.

(b) A guardian or conservator of the client.

(d) A successor, assignee, trustee in dissolution, or any similar representative of an organization, corporation, or association or other entity, either public or private, whether or not in existence.

(e) The lawyer, but only on behalf of the client. The lawyer’s authority to claim the privilege is presumed in the absence of contrary evidence.

(4) There is no lawyer-client privilege under this section when:

(a) The services of the lawyer were sought or obtained to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit what the client knew was a crime or fraud.

(b) A communication is relevant to an issue between parties who claim through the same deceased client.

(c) A communication is relevant to an issue of breach of duty by the lawyer to the client or by the client to the lawyer, arising from the lawyer-client relationship.

(d) A communication is relevant to an issue concerning the intention or competence of a client executing an attested document to which the lawyer is an attesting witness, or concerning the execution or attestation of the document.

(e) A communication is relevant to a matter of common interest between two or more clients, or their successors in interest, if the communication was made by any of them to a lawyer retained or consulted in common when offered in a civil action between the clients or their successors in interest.

(5) Communications made by a person who seeks or receives services from the Department of Revenue under the child support enforcement program to the attorney representing the department shall be confidential and privileged as provided for in this section. Such communications shall not be disclosed to anyone other than the agency except as provided for in this section. Such disclosures shall be protected as if there were an attorney-client relationship between the attorney for the agency and the person who seeks services from the department.

(6) A discussion or activity that is not a meeting for purposes of s. 286.011 shall not be construed to waive the attorney-client privilege established in this section. This shall not be construed to constitute an exemption to either s. 119.07 or s. 286.011.

History.—s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; s. 22, ch. 78-361; s. 1, ch. 78-379; s. 16, ch. 92-138; s. 12, ch. 94-124; s. 1378, ch. 95-147; s. 1, ch. 2000-316.

F.S. 90.502 on Google Scholar

F.S. 90.502 on Casetext

Amendments to 90.502

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 90.502

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 90.502.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 90.502

Total Results: 20

Mitchell Robert Landis v. State of Florida

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2024-12-11

Snippet: 633 (Fla. 1991). Further, according to section 90.502(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2022), a client in the

AKERMAN, LLP v. SANDRA COHEN

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2022-11-09

Snippet: privilege belongs to and protects the client. See § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. (2021) (“A client has a privilege

PAPA JOHN'S USA, INC., A FOREIGN PROFIT CORPORATION, AND LORENA GONZALEZ vs PAULA MOORE

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2022-07-15

Snippet: rendition of legal services to the client.” § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. (2021). However, “A person who has

WILLIAM HAMILTON ARTHUR ARCHITECT, INC. v. JEFFREY C. SCHNEIDER

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2022-06-29

Snippet: extraordinary circumstances delineated by section 90.502 of the Florida Statutes – the statute that codifies

KELLY NELSON v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2022-03-09

Snippet: analysis to the deposition. Codified in section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2022), “[t]he attorney- client

KELLY NELSON v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2021-11-10

Snippet: analysis to the deposition. Codified in section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2021), “[t]he attorney- client

EDWARD BRINKMANN v. PETRO WELT TRADING

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2021-09-29

Snippet: asserting the long-established attorney-client, see § 90.502, or accountant-client, see § 90.5055, privileges

Tina Lasonya Brown v. State of Florida & Tina Lasonya Brown v. Mark S. Inch, etc.

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2020-08-27

Snippet: the email under section 90.502(2), Florida Statutes (2019). Section 90.502(2) provides that “[a] client

STEVEN PAUL ANDERSON v. MARY MITCHELL

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2019-04-05

Snippet: rendition of legal services to the client." § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. (2017) (emphasis added); see also

Nemours Found. v. Arroyo

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-12-14

Citation: 262 So. 3d 208

Snippet: attorney-client privilege, codified at section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2017), extends to communications

Nemours Found. v. Arroyo

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-12-14

Citation: 262 So. 3d 208

Snippet: attorney-client privilege, codified at section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2017), extends to communications

Sedgwick Claims v. Feller

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-01-29

Citation: 243 So. 3d 465

Snippet: departure from the essential requirements of law. See § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. (2006); see also Genovese v. Provident

In Re: Amendments to the Florida Evidence Code - 2017 Out-of-Cycle Report

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-01-25

Snippet: privileged and protected from disclosure under s. 90.502 to the same extent as if the client were not acting

State Farm v. Knapp

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2018-01-08

Snippet: attorney-client privilege is governed by section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2016), which provides that

United Services Auto. Assoc. v. Law Offices of Herssein and Herssein, P.A.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-12-13

Snippet: attorney-client privilege is codified in section 90.502(2) of the Florida Statutes (2017), which provides

City of Homestead v. McDonough

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-11-01

Snippet: Chapter 119, section 768.28(16)(b), and section 90.502, as they contained the impressions of attorneys

OIL, LLC v. Stamax Corp.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-06-21

Citation: 220 So. 3d 1198, 2017 WL 2664686, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 8988

Snippet: with this well-established legal rule, section 90.502(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2015), provides that “[a]

Lerma-Fusco v. Smith

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-06-16

Citation: 220 So. 3d 562, 2017 WL 2605129, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 8849

Snippet: addressed at the subsequent evidentiary hearing. See § 90.502, Fla. Stat. (2015). Thus, Florida Rule of Appellate

Douberley v. Perlmutter

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-05-24

Citation: 219 So. 3d 854, 2017 WL 2264617, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 7542

Snippet: the client kneio was a crime or fraud.” See. § 90.502(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2016) (emphasis added). The

Randy W. Tundidor v. State of Florida

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-04-27

Citation: 221 So. 3d 587, 42 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 507, 2017 WL 1506854, 2017 Fla. LEXIS 925

Snippet: their clients are protected by privilege. See § 90.502, Fla. Stat.; see also McWatters v. State, 36 So