Legal Definitions - communication

In legal contexts, the term communication refers broadly to the act of sharing information, ideas, or feelings. This can happen through various means, such as speaking, writing, using gestures, or even through one's actions. It encompasses both the process of conveying information and the information itself that is exchanged.

• Example 1: During a town hall meeting, a resident stands up and voices their concerns about a proposed zoning change to the city council.
  Explanation: This illustrates communication through speech, where the resident expresses their views and the city council members perceive this information.
• Example 2: A company sends out an email to all employees outlining new safety protocols for the workplace.
  Explanation: This is an example of communication through writing, where important information is conveyed to a large group to ensure understanding and compliance.
• Example 3: A witness in a courtroom points to a defendant when asked to identify the person they saw at a crime scene.
  Explanation: This demonstrates communication through a gesture, where a non-verbal action effectively conveys specific information to the court.

Conditionally Privileged Communication

A conditionally privileged communication is a statement that might otherwise be considered defamatory (harmful to someone's reputation) but is protected by law because it was made in good faith, without malice, and shared between individuals who both have a legitimate interest in the information. This protection is "conditional" because it can be lost if the person making the statement acted with bad intent or reckless disregard for the truth.

• Example 1: A manager at a retail store, in a private conversation with a district supervisor, expresses concerns about a particular employee's consistent tardiness and poor customer service, providing specific examples.
  Explanation: This communication is conditionally privileged because both the manager and the supervisor have a shared interest in the employee's performance and the store's operations. If the manager made the statements truthfully and without malicious intent, they would likely be protected, even if the statements were negative.
• Example 2: A parent writes a letter to the school principal expressing genuine concerns about a specific teacher's classroom management style, based on observations and their child's reports.
  Explanation: The parent and principal both share an interest in the child's education and the school environment. If the parent's concerns are expressed in good faith and without a desire to harm the teacher's reputation, the communication would be conditionally privileged.
• Example 3: During a board meeting, a board member raises questions about the financial integrity of a specific vendor the company is considering, citing specific red flags they discovered during their due diligence.
  Explanation: All board members have a shared interest in the company's financial health and making sound business decisions. The board member's statements, if made in good faith to protect the company, would be conditionally privileged, even if they cast a negative light on the vendor.

Confidential Communication

A confidential communication is a conversation or exchange of information that occurs within a special, legally recognized relationship and is protected from being revealed in a legal proceeding. The law recognizes certain relationships as requiring privacy to function effectively, and therefore, information shared within these relationships cannot be compelled for disclosure in court.

• Example 1: A patient discusses their deepest fears and anxieties with their licensed therapist during a private session.
  Explanation: This is a confidential communication because the patient-therapist relationship is legally protected. The therapist cannot be forced to disclose what was said in court without the patient's consent, as privacy is crucial for effective therapy.
• Example 2: A person confesses their sins and seeks spiritual guidance from a priest during a sacrament of reconciliation.
  Explanation: The communication between a penitent and a priest (or similar spiritual advisor) is considered confidential. The priest is legally and ethically bound not to reveal the contents of the confession, even under subpoena.
• Example 3: A client reveals sensitive details about their business strategy and potential legal liabilities to their attorney while seeking legal advice.
  Explanation: This falls under attorney-client privilege, a form of confidential communication. The attorney cannot be compelled to disclose this information in court, as it is essential for clients to feel safe sharing all relevant facts to receive proper legal representation.

Ex Parte Communication

An ex parte communication refers to a discussion or exchange of information between a lawyer or a party involved in a lawsuit and the judge, without the opposing lawyer or party being present. Such communications are generally prohibited in most legal proceedings to ensure fairness, transparency, and to prevent one side from gaining an unfair advantage or influencing the judge without the other side having an opportunity to respond.

• Example 1: A lawyer sends a private email to the judge presiding over their case, requesting a specific scheduling change, without copying the opposing counsel on the email.
  Explanation: This is an ex parte communication because the lawyer is communicating directly with the judge about a matter related to the case without the other side being aware or having a chance to object or comment.
• Example 2: During a court recess, a defendant approaches the judge in the hallway and attempts to explain their side of the story without their attorney or the prosecutor present.
  Explanation: This constitutes an ex parte communication because a party to the case is attempting to influence the judge outside of formal proceedings and without the opposing side present, which undermines the fairness of the judicial process.
• Example 3: A prosecutor has an unrecorded phone conversation with a judge to discuss the merits of a pending motion in a criminal case, without the defense attorney being included in the call.
  Explanation: This is an ex parte communication because it involves a substantive discussion about the case between one party's representative and the judge, without the knowledge or presence of the opposing counsel.

Privileged Communication

A privileged communication is a type of information exchange that is legally protected from being disclosed in a court of law or used against the person who made it. This protection is often absolute and is established to encourage open and honest communication in certain relationships or situations deemed vital to public policy or individual rights.

• Example 1: A journalist, relying on a state's "shield law," refuses to reveal the identity of a confidential source who provided information for a news story, even when subpoenaed by a grand jury.
  Explanation: This is a privileged communication because the law (in some jurisdictions) protects the journalist-source relationship, recognizing the public interest in protecting sources to ensure the free flow of information. The journalist cannot be compelled to disclose the source's identity.
• Example 2: A high-ranking government official discusses sensitive national security matters with the President and other top advisors in a closed-door meeting.
  Explanation: This falls under executive privilege, which protects certain communications within the executive branch to ensure candid advice and effective decision-making on matters of national importance. These discussions are generally protected from compelled disclosure.
• Example 3: A defendant in a criminal trial chooses not to testify, invoking their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
  Explanation: The defendant's decision not to speak is a form of privileged communication (or rather, the privilege against compelled communication). The law protects individuals from being forced to provide testimony that could be used against them, and their silence cannot be used as evidence of guilt.