Pennsylvania Supreme Court makes major ruling on attorney-client privilege.

For several years the courts in Pennsylvania held that the attorney-client privilege applied only to communications made by the client to counsel, i.e., client–to–attorney communications.  Pursuant to then–existing precedent, inquiries regarding advice given by an attorney to his client was fair game during litigation discovery, especially during depositions.  The one-way nature of the privilege created an obstacle for attorney-client communications.

Recently in the matter of Gillard v. AIG Insurance Co., the Supreme Court eliminated this obstacle when it held that "in Pennsylvania, the attorney-client privilege operates in a two–way fashion to protect confidential client to attorney or attorney to client communications made for the purpose of obtaining or providing professional legal advice."

By ruling in this fashion, the Supreme Court made it more difficult for attorneys who were aware of the privilege's former one-way protection to pierce the privilege.  More importantly the new ruling provides necessary and appropriate protections to clients seeking confidential advice from the Council.  Clients are now free to discuss confidential matters with counsel and receive advice from counsel without fear that the communications will be obtained by opposing counsel.