Another big legal blunder in the script. Where was the consultant? In the discrimination lawsuit against the organization for the deaf, the CEO tells McKenzie he can’t reveal to the board what he has learned during the case about her alleged financial improprieties, because she is protected by attorney-client privilege. However, the suit is not against her personally; it is against the organization. Leland is thus the organization’s attorney and any privilege is with the organization, not her personally. Nothing prevents Leland from disclosing what he has learned to the organization’s board. If that had been his reply to her efforts to silence him, rather than threatening to resign from the case, as he does in the plot, it would have made for a much more interesting — and legally accurate — plot development.
Shout by Marc SBlockedParent2024-05-13T11:02:18Z
Another big legal blunder in the script. Where was the consultant? In the discrimination lawsuit against the organization for the deaf, the CEO tells McKenzie he can’t reveal to the board what he has learned during the case about her alleged financial improprieties, because she is protected by attorney-client privilege. However, the suit is not against her personally; it is against the organization. Leland is thus the organization’s attorney and any privilege is with the organization, not her personally. Nothing prevents Leland from disclosing what he has learned to the organization’s board. If that had been his reply to her efforts to silence him, rather than threatening to resign from the case, as he does in the plot, it would have made for a much more interesting — and legally accurate — plot development.