Attorney-Client Privilege Defined (Framework Card)

 In the United States criminal justice system, truth-seeking ought to take precedence over attorney-client privilege.

Currently, in the US justice system, we value attorney-client privilege over truth seeking. This stems from different places historically and presently. I think this card does a good job of giving your framework three things: 1) establishing the trade-off between truth-seeking and attorney client privilege; 2) showing limits on attorney-client privilege; 3) establishing the purpose of the privilege. On aff, I would just run the part up until the conflict is established, so you can run good trade-off arguments. On neg, running the whole thing gives you good spikes for mitigating some of aff's offense. Here's the card:

Flynn, Lisa Borelli. “NOTE: CEO, CFO, COO ... Cube Dweller? Attorney-Client Privilege and Corporate Communication: Whose Communications Should Massachusetts Law Protect?” Suffolk University Law Review (2010).
 Attorney-client privilege allows a client to refuse to disclose - and prevents his attorney from disclosing - confidential communications the client made in seeking or obtaining legal advice. 24 While historically the policy-based thrust behind the privilege centered on the confidential relationship between attorney and client, the present-day concern focuses on promoting "full and frank communication between attorneys and clients," as stated by the Supreme Court in Upjohn. 25 A central criticism of the attorney-client privilege is that it allows attorneys to conceal information harmful to their clients' cases and frustrates the truth-seeking purpose of the legal process. 26 While this may be true, the value society places on the privilege may outweigh the harm resulting from suppression of evidence. 27 In order to balance these competing policies, it is  [*705]  generally accepted that privileges should be narrowly construed based on the circumstances surrounding the communication. 28
 Both federal and state courts recognize testimonial privilege law as an exception to the duty to disclose information relevant to a matter at hand. 29 State law governs privileges at the state level as well as in federal diversity cases, and federal common law governs in federal question cases. 30 The attorney-client privilege is as follows:
  [*706]
 (1) Where legal advice of any kind is sought, (2) from a professional legal adviser in his capacity as such, (3) the communications relating to that purpose, (4) made in confidence (5) by the client, (6) are at his insistence permanently protected (7) from disclosure by himself or by the legal adviser, (8) except the protection be waived." 31
 The lawyer's ethical responsibility to maintain confidences extends to potential clients and current clients, both during and after representation. 32
 An attorney may not disclose confidential information unless the client consents or waives the privilege, the law requires the attorney to disclose, or the attorney must disclose to prevent a crime or fraud. 33 If the privilege applies, it is absolute absent one of the aforementioned circumstances. 34 The client is the holder of this absolute privilege, not the attorney. 35 Thus, it is the client, as proponent of the privilege, who has the burden of demonstrating its application in a particular case. 36 This personal and individualized element of attorney-client privilege is what complicates its application to a fictional entity, such as a corporation. 37