The attorney-client privilege ordinarily does not protect “who, what, when, where”-type questions about clients’ communications with their lawyers or the general topic of those communications. But it can be difficult to draw the line between those permissible inquiries and questions that would invade the attorney-client privilege.
In Strebel v. Scoular, Case No. 24 C 968, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42519 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 2, 2026), the court applied generic federal privilege law to federal and pendent Illinois state law claims (avoiding application of Illinois’ quirky “control group” standard for corporate communications). The court acknowledged that Illinois precedent “gives us little practical guidance” about where to draw the line between permissible “foundational questions” about lawyer-client communications and impermissible specific questions that would intrude into privileged areas. Id. at *13-14. The former category includes questions about the fact, place and time of communications; the “broad nature of the lawsuit”; and “very broad subject matters.” Id. The latter category includes questions that “touched on very specific facts” or on a “highly specific subject.” Id. at *15.
The court ultimately found that defense counsel had improperly instructed witnesses not to answer very general questions about discussions they had during a deposition break. But the court denied sanctions, finding that the improper instructions “did not deprive Plaintiffs of any meaningful information.” Id.