June 13, 2025 — In his article “Attorney-Client Privilege Versus the Right to Put On a Defense,”  Bradley E. Oppenheimer, a partner at Kellogg Hansen, explores a critical legal tension: when a criminal defendant’s constitutional right to present a defense conflicts with a third party’s attorney-client privilege.

The issue often arises in white-collar cases where corporate employees seek to raise an “advice of counsel” defense. However, since the corporation—not the individual—holds the privilege, it can block access to key legal communications. Brad examines current legal approaches and proposes a novel solution: using Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) to allow limited disclosure of privileged communications without full waiver, preserving fairness for defendants while respecting corporate privilege.

Read the full article on Westlaw, Lexis, or in the Document Library.

Bradley E. Oppenheimer represents clients in high-stakes litigation and investigations, focusing on securities, FinTech and cryptocurrency litigation, False Claims Act proceedings, consumer protection, and complex commercial disputes.  He holds a track record of successful outcomes for both plaintiffs and defendants.

Bradley Oppenheimer, Attorney-Client Privilege Versus the Right to Put On A Defense, 38 Geo. J. Legal Ethics 1 (2025).