Cases from cite.case.law:

NEMOURS FOUNDATION, v. ARROYO, a, 262 So. 3d 208 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Florida's attorney-client privilege, codified at section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2017), extends to . . .

BURROW, M. R. Z. B. a D. R. Z. B. a v. FORJAS TAURUS S. A. L. C., 334 F. Supp. 3d 1222 (S.D. Fla. 2018)

. . . . § 90.502(2). . . . Stat. § 90.502 ). . . .

SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. v. FELLER, R. R. P. A. G., 243 So. 3d 465 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . See § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. (2006) ; see also Genovese v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. . . .

IN RE AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA EVIDENCE CODE- OUT- OF- CYCLE REPORT, 234 So. 3d 565 (Fla. 2018)

. . . between a lawyer and a client acting as a fiduciary is privileged and protected from disclosure under s. 90.502 . . . In applying s. 90.502 to a communication under this section, only the person or entity acting as a fiduciary . . . section does not affect the crime or fraud exception to the lawyer-client privilege provided in s. 90.502 . . .

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. C. KNAPP, 234 So. 3d 843 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

. . . The attorney-client privilege is governed by section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2016), which provides . . .

UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, v. LAW OFFICES OF HERSSEIN AND HERSSEIN, P. A., 233 So. 3d 1224 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Privilege and the “Malpractice Exception” Florida’s attorney-client privilege is codified in section 90.502 . . . See § 90.502(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2017). . . . The “malpractice exception” to the privilege is codified in section 90.502(4)(c), which provides that . . . 537-38 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (recognizing that because the lawyer-client privilege set forth in section 90.502 . . .

CITY OF HOMESTEAD, v. Dr. MCDONOUGH,, 232 So. 3d 1069 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . documents requested were exempt from production under Chapter 119, section 768.28(16)(b), and section 90.502 . . .

OIL, LLC L. v. STAMAX CORP., 220 So. 3d 1198 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Consistent with this well-established legal rule, section 90.502(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2015), provides . . .

LERMA- FUSCO a k a a k a v. SMITH,, 220 So. 3d 562 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . See § 90.502, Fla. Stat. (2015). . . .

DOUBERLEY, v. PERLMUTTER,, 219 So. 3d 854 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . . § 90.502(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2016) (emphasis added). . . .

W. TUNDIDOR, v. STATE, 221 So. 3d 587 (Fla. 2017)

. . . See § 90.502, Fla. Stat.; see also McWatters v. State, 36 So.3d 613, 636 (Fla. 2010). . . .

ABSOLUTE ACTIVIST VALUE MASTER FUND LIMITED, v. DEVINE,, 262 F. Supp. 3d 1312 (M.D. Fla. 2017)

. . . Stat. § 90.502(2). . . . Stat. § 90.502(2). . . . Stat. § 90.502(l)(c). . . . Stat. § 90.502(l)(c). . . . Stat. § 90.502(2). . . .

WORLEY, v. CENTRAL FLORIDA YOUNG MEN S CHRISTIAN ASS N, INC., 228 So. 3d 18 (Fla. 2017)

. . . It is governed by the Florida Evidence Code, codified at section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2015). . . . . § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. . . . Those reasonably necessary for the transmission of the communication. § 90.502(1)(c), Fla. Stat. . . . While section 90.502(4) provides several exceptions to the attorney-client privilege, none of them apply . . . consulted in common when offered in a civil action between the clients or their successors in interest. § 90.502 . . . Indeed,- section 90.502(2) provides that “[a] client has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent . . .

OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER, v. LAKICEVIC,, 215 So. 3d 112 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . See § 90.502(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2015)R.L.R. v. State, 116 So.3d 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). . . . Section 90.502(l)(c) provides: A communication between lawyer and client is "confidential” if it is not . . .

LEE, v. CONDELL, 208 So. 3d 253 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . that Lee’s Notes are not subject to the attorney-client privilege as a “communication” under section 90.502 . . . The attorney-client privilege governed by the Florida Evidence Code, is codified at section 90.502, Florida . . . Those reasonably necessary for the transmission of the communication. § 90.502(l)(c), Fla. Stat. . . . Indeed, as the Law Revision Council Note to section 90.502, Florida Statutes, states, “the privilege . . . While section 90.502(4), Florida Statutes, provides several exceptions to the attorney-client privilege . . .

D. VASALLO, v. BEAN,, 208 So. 3d 188 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . See § 90.502(4)(b), Fla. . . . See also Law Revision Council Note (1976) to § 90.502(4)(b) (noting that “[w]hen multiple parties claim . . . (“The attorney-client privilege [section 90.502] applies in judicial and other proceedings in which a . . .

BIVINS, v. ROGERS, Jr., 207 F. Supp. 3d 1321 (S.D. Fla. 2016)

. . . .” § 90.502, Fla. Stat. . . . See § 90.502(2),(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2001); Whitener, 715 So.2d at 982; Compson, 629 So.2d at 851. . . . between a lawyer and a client acting as a fiduciary is privileged and protected from disclosure under s. 90.502 . . . In applying s. 90.502 to a communication under this section, only the person or entity acting as a fiduciary . . . section does not affect the crime or fraud exception to the lawyer-client privilege provided in s. 90.502 . . .

MOBLEY, v. HOMESTEAD HOSPITAL, INC., 202 So. 3d 868 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . See § 90.502, Fla. Stat. (2016); Upjohn Co. v. . . .

COFFEY- GARCIA, v. SOUTH MIAMI HOSPITAL, INC., 194 So. 3d 533 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . to as the “attorney-client privilege,” is governed by the Florida Evidence Code, codified at section 90.502 . . . of the communications because they were made in the rendition of legal services to the* client.” § 90.502 . . . Section 90.502(4) provides several exceptions to the attorney-client privilege, none of which apply here . . .

IN RE INTERNATIONAL OIL TRADING COMPANY, LLC,, 548 B.R. 825 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2016)

. . . . § 90.502, which states, in relevant part: (c) A communication between lawyer and client is “confidential . . . Stat. § 90.502(c) requires that the communications be “not intended to be disclosed.” . . . Stat. § 90.502 states that “practicality requires that some disclosure outside the immediate lawyer-client . . . Florida Statutes § 90.502(c)(2) protects communications with those “to whom disclosure is in furtherance . . .

TEDROW, R. v. J. CANNON,, 186 So. 3d 43 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2011),' protects communications between Tedrow and her counsel. . . . .” § 90.502(2). None of the exceptions to the privilege in section 90.502 apply in this case. . . . See § 90.502(4) (listing five exceptions). . . . communications may be relevant to Cannon’s claim for fees, but “there is no exception provided under section 90.502 . . .

PANEBIANCO, v. JACKSON HEALTH SYSTEM, 183 So. 3d 1250 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Sde also § 90.502(4)(c), Fla. . . .

LAS OLAS RIVER HOUSE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. v. LORH, LLC, CPA, PL, d b a, 181 So. 3d 556 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . .” § 90.502(2), Fla.Stat. (2014) (emphasis added). . . . Those reasonably necessary for the transmission of the communication. § 90.502(1)(c), Fla. . . .

BRANNON, D. P. A. v. PALCU, 177 So. 3d 693 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . . § 90.502, Fla. Stat. (2015). . . . . § 90.502(4)(a). . . .

R. BATCHELOR, v. GEICO CASUALTY COMPANY,, 142 F. Supp. 3d 1220 (M.D. Fla. 2015)

. . . . § 90.502(2). . . . Stat., § 90.502(2); Fed.R.Evid. 502(a); see also GAB Bus. Serv., Inc. v. . . . Stat. § 90.502(l)(b). . . . See id. at § 90.502(1)(b). . . . .

JACOBS KEELEY, PLLC, v. CHIEF JUDGE OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,, 169 So. 3d 192 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . 14 e-mails, citing Florida Rules of Judicial Administration 2.420(c)(1) and 2.420(c)(7), and section 90.502 . . .

LENDER PROCESSING SERVICES, INC. v. ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY,, 183 So. 3d 1052 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Section 90.502, Florida Statutes, which is entitled “Lawyer-client privilege,” provides in part: (1) . . .

FLORIDA POWER LIGHT COMPANY, v. W. HICKS,, 162 So. 3d 1074 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Moreover, we note that there is no exception provided under section 90.502[, Florida Statutes] that allows . . .

AG BEAUMONT LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC AG LLC, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A. LLC LLC,, 160 So. 3d 510 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . The attorney-client privilege is codified in section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2013): “A client has a . . . learned of the communications because they were made in the rendition of legal services to the client.” § 90.502 . . . than” those necessary for the rendition of legal services or the transmission of the communication. § 90.502 . . . [t]hose reasonably necessary for the transmission of the communication.” § 90.502(l)(c)(2). . . .

BUTLER, v. HARTER,, 152 So. 3d 705 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Attorney-Client Privilege The attorney-client privilege is set forth in section 90.502(2), Florida Statutes . . .

MARKEL AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, v. BAKER,, 152 So. 3d 86 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . See generally § 90.502, Fla. Stat. (2013) (governing "[Ijawyer-client privilege”). . . .

S. KIRSCH, s S. W. J. v. BRIGHTSTAR CORPORATION,, 68 F. Supp. 3d 846 (N.D. Ill. 2014)

. . . Under Florida law, the attorney-client privilege is codified in section 90.502 of the Florida Statutes . . . Stat. § 90.502(1)(c), (2); see also Genovese v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. . . .

BOOZER III, v. STALLEY,, 146 So. 3d 139 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Moreover, we note that there is no exception provided under section 90.502 that allows the discovery . . . 627.155, does not mean that Boozer gave up her statutory attorney-client privilege, codified in section 90.502 . . .

STATE v. TOPPS,, 142 So. 3d 978 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . certain third parties can be found in many of the Florida privileges, i.e., lawyer-client privilege (§ 90.502 . . .

GUARANTEE INSURANCE CO. a v. HEFFERNAN INSURANCE BROKERS, INC. a a, 300 F.R.D. 590 (S.D. Fla. 2014)

. . . Lisa Daly Lady Decor, Inc., 698 So.2d 276, 278 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) ("Section 90.502(1)(c), Florida Statutes . . .

TUMELAIRE, v. NAPLES ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., 137 So. 3d 596 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Pursuant to section 90.502(2), Florida Statutes (2013), “[a] client has a privilege to refuse to disclose . . .

MONTANEZ, v. PUBLIX SUPER MARKETS, INC., 135 So. 3d 510 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Section 90.502(l)(e), Florida Statutes (2012), provides generally that a communication between a lawyer . . .

RC PB, INC. v. RITZ- CARLTON HOTEL COMPANY, L. L. C. L. L. C., 132 So. 3d 325 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . . §§ 90.502(l)(c)12, Fla. Stat. (2012). . . .

MAPLEWOOD PARTNERS, L. P. L. P. LLC, v. INDIAN HARBOR INSURANCE COMPANY,, 295 F.R.D. 550 (S.D. Fla. 2013)

. . . Stat. § 90.502, or the Deason factors. . . . Stat. § 90.502(4)(e). . . . Stat. § 90.502. . . . Stat. § 90.502(4)(a),(c). . . . Stat. § 90.502(2). . . .

IN RE TAYLOR, BEAN WHITAKER MORTGAGE CORPORATION, s, v., 493 B.R. 872 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2013)

. . . . § 90.502(l)(c). . . .

R. L. R. a v. STATE, 116 So. 3d 570 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . Section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2012), states, “[A] client has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and . . . The privilege is codified by statute and contained in the Evidence Code, section 90.502, Florida Statutes . . . Section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2012), lists extraordinary circumstances where the attorney-client . . .

B. BRUGMANN, v. STATE, 117 So. 3d 39 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . Additionally, under section 90.502(4)(a), if a client consults an attorney for advice which will aid . . .

In P. HOLDSWORTH, III, v. W. W. LLC,, 495 B.R. 544 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2013)

. . . . § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. . § 90.502(4)(a), Fla. Stat. . First Union Nat’l Bank v. . . .

UBIQUITI NETWORKS, INC. v. KOZUMI USA CORP., 295 F.R.D. 517 (N.D. Fla. 2013)

. . . . § 90.502 and Fed. R.Evid. 502. . . . .

CAMPERO USA CORP. v. ADS FOODSERVICE, LLC,, 916 F. Supp. 2d 1284 (S.D. Fla. 2012)

. . . . § 90.502 (the codification of the Florida attorney-client privilege) and Southern Bell Telephone Co . . .

M. WITTE, v. D. WITTE,, 126 So. 3d 1076 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . At the hearing, the wife’s counsel relied on section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2011). . . . Subsection 90.502(2) provides that “[a] client has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent . . . Those reasonably nécessary for the transmission of the communication. § 90.502(l)(c), Fla. . . . As there are not many Florida appellate court opinions construing section 90.502(l)(c), the wife relies . . . argues that the trial court made a factual determination that neither exception to the waiver of section 90.502 . . .

STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, v. PUIG, 62 So. 3d 23 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . See § 90.502(4), Fla. . . . known in the common law and is now codified by statute and contained in the Evidence Code, section 90.502 . . .

R. GENOVESE, M. D. v. PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY,, 74 So. 3d 1064 (Fla. 2011)

. . . The attorney-client privilege is provided for in section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2010), which states . . . learned of the communications because they were made in the rendition of legal services to the client.” § 90.502 . . . Moreover, we note that there is no exception provided under section 90.502 that allows the discovery . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA EVIDENCE CODE, 53 So. 3d 1019 (Fla. 2011)

. . . The Committee has also proposed a comment to sections 90.502 and 90.507, Florida Statutes, related to . . .

HAGANS, v. GATORLAND KUBOTA, LLC SENTRY INSURANCE,, 45 So. 3d 73 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2009), sets forth the attorney-client privilege, in pertinent part, . . .

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. R. COLLINGWOOD, 43 So. 3d 952 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . recipient to inform the recipient that the attorney represents the agency and not the recipient); § 90.502 . . .

W. McWATTERS, v. STATE, 36 So. 3d 613 (Fla. 2010)

. . . Section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2006), establishes a statutory privilege for communications between . . .

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. M. LEVESQUE,, 263 F.R.D. 663 (M.D. Fla. 2010)

. . . . § 90.502(l)(c). . . .

P. MINAKAN, v. S. HUSTED,, 27 So. 3d 695 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . See § 90.502(4)(a), Fla. . . . See § 90.502(l)(c), Fla. . . .

NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY, INC. a v. JACOBSON,, 25 So. 3d 82 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . . § 90.502(l)(e), Fla. Stat. (2008). The privilege belongs to the client, see Neu v. . . .

SCOTT a k a A. v. A. SCOTT,, 17 So. 3d 918 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . We recognize that section 90.502(4), Florida Statutes (2008), outlines five situations where there is . . .

H. MULLINS, D. M. D. v. TOMPKINS,, 15 So. 3d 798 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . The privilege is codified in section 90.502(2), Florida Statutes (2008): “A client has a privilege to . . . Pursuant to section 90.502(1 )(c), Florida Statutes (2008), "[a] communication between lawyer and client . . .

S I INVESTMENTS, a v. PAYLESS FLEA MARKET, INC., 10 So. 3d 699 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Section 90.502(1), Florida Statutes, provides: (c) A communication between lawyer and client is “confidential . . . lawyer to the client or by the client to the lawyer, arising from the lawyer-client relationship. § 90.502 . . . breach of duty between the lawyer and client, the communications were not protected by the privilege. § 90.502 . . .

PREFERRED CARE PARTNERS HOLDING CORP. v. HUMANA, INC., 258 F.R.D. 684 (S.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . . § 90.502(1)(c); accord Cunningham v. Appel, 831 So.2d 214, 215 (Fla. 5th Dist.Ct.App. 2002). . . .

WEST BEND MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. HIGGINS P., 9 So. 3d 655 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . known in the common law and is now codified by statute and contained in the Evidence Code, section 90.502 . . . Section 90.502 recognizes certain limited exceptions to attorney-client privilege, most notably, where . . . a crime or fraud is facilitated through attorney-client communications. § 90.502(4)(a), Fla. . . .

FORD MOTOR COMPANY, v. HALL- EDWARDS,, 997 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 90.502, Fla. Stat. (2000); Southern Bell Tel., 632 So.2d 1377. . . .

BRICKELL ASSOCIATES, v. Q. B. E. INSURANCE COMPANY,, 253 F.R.D. 697 (S.D. Fla. 2008)

. . . Under Florida statute § 90.502, the attorney-client privilege exists when a client consults “a lawyer . . .

SAMUEL, n k a a MATHIS v. SHANDS TEACHING HOSPITAL AND CLINICS, INC., 984 So. 2d 627 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . .” § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. (2007). . . . Those reasonably necessary for the transmission of the communication.” § 90.502(l)(c), Fla. . . .

FLORIDA HOSPITAL WATERMAN, INC. v. M. BUSTER, v., 984 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 2008)

. . . Stat. (2006) (providing for journalist’s privilege); § 90.502, Fla. . . .

MORDENTI, v. STATE, 982 So. 2d 710 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 90.502(2), Fla. . . . See § 90.502(3). . Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). . . . . See § 90.502(3), Fla. Stat. (2005); Restatement (Third) of the Law Governing Lawyers § 86 (2000). . . .

MILINAZZO, v. STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY,, 247 F.R.D. 691 (S.D. Fla. 2007)

. . . . § 90.502. . . .

BNP PARIBAS, a a v. A. WYNNE, III, A. III No., 967 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 90.502(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2007). It ordered Duke to respond. . . . obtained to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit what the client knew was a crime or fraud.” § 90.502 . . .

In LENTEK INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. P. A. a v. P. A., 377 B.R. 396 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2007)

. . . Rather, the plaintiff supports his argument relying on the definition of “client” contained in Section 90.502 . . . Section 90.502(l)(b) of the Florida Evidence Code, intended to assist parties and the courts in determining . . . rejects this argument finding that the definition of a “client” supplied in Florida Statute Section 90.502 . . . Indeed, Section 90.502, by its own limiting language, states that the test was for the purpose of that . . . However, the Court did not conclude that Section 90.502(1)(b) of the Florida Evidence Code supplied the . . .

REYNOLDS, v. STATE, 963 So. 2d 908 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2006), provides that communications between a client and a lawyer for . . .

WAGNER, v. ORANGE COUNTY,, 960 So. 2d 785 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . County asserted two grounds for non-disclosure: the attorney-client privilege contained in section 90.502 . . .

PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, v. SCOMA,, 975 So. 2d 461 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . The attorney-client privilege is codified in section 90.502(2), Florida Statutes (2000), which states . . . See § 90.502(4)(e). . . . This is understandable because the statutory lawyer-client privilege, section 90.502, was not created . . . Section 90.502(2) creates a lawyer-client privilege that is possessed by the client. . . . .” § 90.502(3)(d). Ms. Scoma has no assignment from Mr. . . .

STATE v. BRANHAM,, 952 So. 2d 618 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . The Basis for the Lawyer-Client Privilege Section 90.502(2), Florida Statutes (2005), provides that “ . . . Under section 90.502(l)(b), client is defined as “any person ... who consults a lawyer with the purpose . . . only applies to communications if they “were made in the rendition of legal services to the client.” § 90.502 . . . lawyer with the purpose of obtaining legal services” or was “rendered legal services by a lawyer.” § 90.502 . . . (l)(b) and 90.502(2). . . . I also note that section 90.502(4), Florida Statutes (2005), states as follows: “There is no lawyer-client . . .

KRANIAS, v. TSIOGAS, a k a LLC, LLC, LLC, LLC,, 941 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . The circuit court based its holding on section 90.502(4)(d), Florida Statutes (2002), which provides . . . We conclude that the circuit court erred in ordering the production of this letter based on section 90.502 . . .

A. SEGARRA, III, v. SEGARRA,, 932 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . See §§ 90.502, 90.503, 90.504, 90.505, 90.5055, Fla. Stat. (2004). . . .

XL SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, v. AIRCRAFT HOLDINGS, LLC,, 929 So. 2d 578 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . in this instance, the applicability of section 90.502 is substantive rather than procedural. . . . Miami Herald Publ’g Co., 468 So.2d 218 (Fla.1985) (comparing chapter 119 and section 90.502 regarding . . . Accordingly, the express provisions of section 90.502 apply and the attorney-client privilege is not . . . Moreover, section 90.502(3) describes who may claim the privilege: (a) The client. . . . See § 90.502(4), Fla. . . .

CHOMAT v. NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, 919 So. 2d 535 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . .” § 90.502(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2005). . . .

BLACK, v. STATE, 920 So. 2d 668 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Section 90.502, Florida Statutes, codifies the attorney-client evidentiary privilege. . . . More importantly for our analysis, however, is the limitation to the privilege contained in section 90.502 . . . parties, they could not be considered to be confidential communications within the meaning of section 90.502 . . . The court, with an eye to section 90.502(l)(c)2., determined that the defendant’s mother had been acting . . .

ANDERSON COLUMBIA v. BROWN,, 902 So. 2d 838 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . See § 90.502, Fla. Stat. (2003). As this court noted in First Union National Bank v. . . .

HERRERA, v. HERRERA,, 895 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . See § 90.502(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2002); Jenney v. . . .

GINSBURG, M. P. A. a v. D. PACHTER, a, 893 So. 2d 586 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . The letter referenced section 90.502, Florida Statutes (2003), and cited Southern Bell Telephone and . . . Section 90.502, Florida Statutes .(2003) addresses lawyer-client privilege. . . . See § 90.502(4), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . Pachter’s allegations of breach of fiduciary duty,-finding an exception to the privilege under section 90.502 . . . See § 90.502(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . .

LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. S. KAUFMAN,, 885 So. 2d 905 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Section 90.502, Florida Statutes, which protects attorney client communications, includes several exceptions . . . Specific to the instant case, section 90.502(4), provides: (4) There is no lawyer-client privilege under . . . to a lawyer retained or consulted in common when offered in a civil action between the clients.... § 90.502 . . .

M. JACOB, Co- H. E. Co- H. v. A. BARTON, Jr. Co- H. E. A. Co-, 877 So. 2d 935 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . See § 90.502(2), (3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2001); Whitener, 715 So.2d at 982; Compson, 629 So.2d at 851. . . . See § 90.502(4); Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. Fla. . . . WHATLEY and STRINGER, JJ, Concur. . § 90.502, Fla. Stat. (2001). . . . .

M. ALEXANDER, v. TANDEM STAFFING SOLUTIONS, INC. a L. L. C. a a, 881 So. 2d 607 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . .” § 90.502(4)(c), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . of rule 4-1.6(c)(2) and an “issue of breach of duty ... by the client to the lawyer” under section 90.502 . . .

JACKSON, v. BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS, a d. b. a. B., 372 F.3d 1250 (11th Cir. 2004)

. . . Evid.Code § 90.502(l)(b) (emphasis added). . . . .

CAPUTO, v. NOUSKHAJIAN,, 871 So. 2d 266 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Section 90.502(4)(b), Florida Statutes (2000), authorizes the introduction of an attorney’s testimony . . . Section 90.502 provides: (4)There is no lawyer-client privilege under this section when: (b) A communication . . .

HODGSON RUSS, LLP, v. B. TRUBE,, 867 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . some discussion as to whether the criminal act exception to the attorney-client privilege of section 90.502 . . .

UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, a USAA v. S. ROTH, 859 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . documents in question and find that they are protected by the attorney-client privilege under section 90.502 . . .

BUTLER, PAPPAS, WEIHMULLER, v. CORAL REEF OF KEY BISCAYNE DEVELOPERS, INC., 873 So. 2d 339 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . whether a crime or fraud was committed and hence applied to the attorney-client privilege, under section 90.502 . . . See § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. (2003). See also Haskell Co. v. Georgia Pac. . . . Under section 90.502(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2003), there is no attorney-client privilege, as provided . . . for in section 90.502(2), when “[t]he services of the lawyer were sought or obtained to enable or aid . . .

SULTAN, D. D. S. D. D. S. P. A. a v. EARING- DOUD, 852 So. 2d 313 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . See § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. (2002). . . .

W. JENNEY, v. AIRDATA WIMAN, INC., 846 So. 2d 664 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . . § 90.502(2), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . . . § 90.502(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . .

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, a v. J. McGEE, a J. J. a a, 837 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . See § 90.502(4)(a)-(e), Fla. Stat. (1997); E. Air Lines, Inc. v. U.S. . . . See § 90.502(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997); Am. Tobacco Co. v. . . .

NILES, v. J. MALLARDI, Jr., 828 So. 2d 1076 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Section 90.502(4), Florida Statutes (2002) provides that there is no attorney-client privilege where . . .

T. CUNNINGHAM, v. H. APPEL,, 831 So. 2d 214 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Section 90.502(2), Florida Statutes, provides that a client has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA EVIDENCE CODE, 825 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 2002)

. . . Chapter 2000-316, section 1, amends section 90.502, Florida Statutes (Lawyer-client privilege), Florida . . . Florida Statutes, shall not be construed to waive the attorney-client privilege established under section 90.502 . . .

STATE v. FAMIGLIETTI,, 817 So. 2d 901 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . (citing § 90.502, Fla. Stat.). . . . See § 90.502(4), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . .

STATE v. GRADY,, 811 So. 2d 829 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . See §§ 90.502, 90.504, Fla. Stat. (2000). . . .

F. PAULUCCI, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 190 F. Supp. 2d 1312 (M.D. Fla. 2002)

. . . clause in an insurance contract does not eviscerate the attorney-client privilege codified in Section 90.502 . . .

TYNE, Jr. Jo Jr. v. TIME WARNER ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY, L. P. d b a L. L. C., 212 F.R.D. 596 (M.D. Fla. 2002)

. . . . § 90.502(l)(c). . . . Stat. § 90.502(l)(a) — (b). . . . Stat. § 90.502(c)(1) — (2). . . .

CITY OF OLDSMAR, a v. KIMMINS CONTRACTING CORP. a, 805 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . See § 90.502, Fla. Stat. (1999). . . .

OMEGA CONSULTING GROUP, INC. v. TEMPLETON,, 805 So. 2d 1058 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Id. at 1103; see § 90.502(4)(e), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . .