29 U.S.C. § 434
Exemption of attorney-client communications
Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed to require an attorney who is a member in good standing of the bar of any State, to include in any report required to be filed pursuant to the provisions of this chapter any information which was lawfully communicated to such attorney by any of his clients in the course of a legitimate attorney-client relationship.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1964–2016 · leading case: Humphreys, Hutcheson & Moseley v. Donovan, 568 F. Supp. 161 (M.D. Tenn. 1983).
Humphreys, Hutcheson & Moseley v. Donovan, 568 F. Supp. 161 (M.D. Tenn. 1983). “Second, the plaintiff contends that if § 203(b) does apply to its activities, then application of that statute violates the plaintiff’s First Amendment rights of speech, association and privacy. The plaintiff, alternatively, maintains that if the Court finds that § 203(b) may…”
John Mallick v. Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, 749 F.2d 771 (D.C. Cir. 1984). “LMRDA § 204, 29 U.S.C. § 434 (exempting attorney-client communications from any reporting duty of attorney).”
Humphreys, Hutcheson & Moseley v. Raymond J. Donovan, Sec'y of Labor, 755 F.2d 1211 (6th Cir. 1985). “Section 203 provides in pertinent part: (b) Every person who pursuant to any agreement or arrangement with an employer undertakes activities where an object thereof is, directly or indirectly— (1) to persuade employees to exercise or not to exercise, or persuade employees as to…”
Labnet Inc. v. United States Dep't of Labor, 197 F. Supp. 3d 1159 (D. Minnesota 2016). “Plaintiffs also contend that the new rule requires attorneys to disclose confidential information and therefore conflicts with 29 U.S.C. § 434 . For the reasons explained at the hearing, however, the Court interprets § 434 to apply only to information protected by the…”
Douglas v. Wirtz, 232 F. Supp. 348 (M.D.N.C. 1964). “'Secretary of Labor’s interpretation of the Act violated and was contrary to the provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 434 , and therefore these provisions of this section are not alluded to further in this opinion as there exists no contrary contentions thereto.”
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.