STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,

v.

KAREN N. BARKER, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Affiliated OF Fla., Inc. v. U-Need Sundries, Inc., 397 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)
  …October of 1976, Mr. Bartz had no basis for invoking a privilege about what occurred at that time. There is also an attorney-client privilege which would protect confidential communications between Affiliated and its attorneys. Roberts v. Jardine, 366 So. 2d 124 (Fla.2d DCA 1979); Anderson v. State, 297 So. 2d 871 (Fla.2d DCA 1974). The fact that some of the documents containing those communications may be in Affiliated’s possession instead of that of its attorneys makes no difference. “The privilege rule w…
• Travelers Ins. Co. v. Habelow, 405 So. 2d 1361 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
  …including attorney-client communications. Travelers asks that this discovery order be quashed insofar as it encompasses such communications, relying on Skorman v. Hovnanian of Fla., Inc., 382 So. 2d 1876 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980), and Roberts v. Jardine, 366 So. 2d 124 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). See also § 90.502, Fla. Stat. (1979). The trial court’s order apparently was predicated on Stone v. Travelers Insurance Company, 326 So. 2d 241 (Fla.3d DCA 1976), a “bad faith” case. This reliance was misplaced because in defen…
• Williams v. State, 427 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
  …DCA 1977). Second, we think that the state was improperly allowed to cross-examine the defendant as to matters falling within the attorney-client privilege, which error we cannot say was harmless within the context of this case. Roberts v. Jardine, 366 So. 2d 124 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Reversed and remanded for a new trial.…

Authorities Cited

• State v. Allen, 362 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 1978)