for bussins law

IRAC Analysis United States v. Stewart (pg. __) Issue(s) Issue 1 The issue in the case United State v. Stewart is whether or not Stewart has confidentiality rights to protect her from submitting an email she sent to her attorney and her daughter to the United States. For this case, the court is deciding if Stewart is protected by attorney-client privilege, or work product privilege. Issue 2 (or 3 or 4) (If there is more than one) Rule(s) Rule as to Issue 1 The United States argued that any attorney-client privilege Stewart had in this case was surrendered when she forwarded the email to a third party. The work product privilege states that all materials that an attorney is using to prepare for a case, are protected from subpoena. Rule as to Issue 2 (or 3 or 4) (If there is more than one) Analysis Rule 1, Issue 1 The United States was right that Stewart had waived her attorney-client privilege, however, the work product privilege still applies unless she takes an action that increases the risk that the United States would gain access to such materials. The court had to decide on whether or not forwarding the email to a close family member is considered an action that would increase such risk. Rule 2 (or 3 or 4), Issue 2 (or 3 or 4) (If there is more than one) Conclusion The court ruled that Stewart did not in fact have to submit any emails to the United States, for use in court. The court found that forwarding an email to a close family member does not reasonably increase the risk that the government would gain access to it. What I Learned from this Case From this case I learned the finer details on both the attorney-client privilege, and the work product privilege. It helped illustrate both rules and how they are applied. I also learned how you can forfeit one right but not the other, and that an action such as sharing a document from your own legal case with a family member can void a protection you have against that document’s seizure. Discussion: Maria v Hayes3030 unread replies.3030 replies.Original Post: “After reading the case, assume you are a lawyer,  your client, a medical doctor has been approached  by the parents of  a mentally retarded female child to medically sterilize the child. She  comes to you for advice.  What would you advise the doctor to do?   Consider AND Discuss: 1. the inherent powers of the court 2. rights of the child 3. obligations and wishes of the parents 4. other issues discussed by the court You, as a lawyer must be objective and NOT  insert your personal beliefs in the answer.  Use the IRAC analytical format to  respond to each separate issue you find (there are more issues than listed)”CASE Assigned to Analyze:Maria v. Hayes.pdfYou may do additional internet research,   the search terms “Pillow Angel”  and ” Washington”  will be helpful.Response Posts: Respond to another student that gives advice different from yours. List why you think yours is correct or list how you might modify your response based on their post.Respond to the posts of at least 2 other students. It is preferred if you prepare your response in Word and upload the file.  Use spell and grammar check and have Word  check the document for readability before uploading (be advised that Word will not indicate an error if you use a word that is an anagram (“trail” instead of “trial”) or a  homophone  see,  http://users.tinyonline.co.uk/gswithenbank/homophon.htm#T (Links to an external site.) ).  Please include the readability score  with your submission.To insure that the settings in Word  will give you the readability statistics:Go to “Word Options”–“Proofing”–“when correcting spelling and grammar in Word” (make sure all boxes are checked, especially “show readability statistics”) writing style should be “grammar and style”– finally in  “settings” check all boxes.Click here for help on completing a Discussion Board post.  See Calendar above for original post and response post due dates. Be sure that this course is selected in the side menu.REMEMBER:  IF YOU LEAVE OUT ANY  OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS, YOU WILL LOOSE AT LEAST 1/5 OF THE TOTAL POINTS FOR EACH MISSING SECTIONI-IssueR-RuleA-AnalysisC-ConclusionW-What I learned