United States v. Kovel

Rule of Law:

The attorney-client privilege extends to communications made by a client to a non-lawyer, such as an accountant, who is employed to assist the attorney in rendering legal services, provided the communications are made in confidence for the purpose of obtaining legal advice from the attorney.

Facts:

• Kovel, a former IRS agent with accounting skills, was an employee of Kamerman & Kamerman, a law firm specializing in tax law.
• The law firm represented a client named Hopps, who was under investigation by a federal grand jury for alleged income tax violations.
• In the course of his employment, Kovel received a financial statement of Hopps' assets and liabilities.
• Kovel was subpoenaed to testify before the grand jury regarding his communications with Hopps.
• During the grand jury proceedings, Kovel was asked questions about the purpose of receiving Hopps' financial statement and about discussions he had with Hopps concerning his tax matters.
• Kovel refused to answer these questions, asserting the attorney-client privilege on behalf of the client, Hopps.

Procedural Posture:

• Kovel was subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury in the Southern District of New York.
• He refused to answer certain questions, asserting attorney-client privilege.
• The Assistant U.S. Attorney brought Kovel before the United States District Court.
• The district court judge ruled that the privilege did not apply to an accountant and ordered Kovel to answer.
• After returning to the grand jury and again refusing to answer, the judge held Kovel in criminal contempt of court.
• The district court sentenced Kovel to one year in prison.
• Kovel, the appellant, appealed the contempt judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.