r they are in derogation of the search for truth." Nevertheless, the privilege of clients to prevent the disclosure of confidential communications with their lawyers was firmly established in the case of Annesely v. Earl of Anglesea, 17 How. St. Tr. 1228 (1743) in which the Court ruled that "the law hath very justly established, an inviolable secrecy to be observed by attorneys, in order to render it safe for clients to communicate to their attorney all proper instructions."
Under Section 6068(e) of the California Business & Professions Code, it is the duty of an attorney to "maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every peril to himself or herself to preserve the secrets, of his or her client." The ethical component of this stricture is no less compelling for a doctor than it is for the lawyer; however, a critical difference is that the disclosures made by patient are primarily for the purpose of enabling the physician to treat the patient. They are only incidentally related to the legal process. In contrast, disclosures made by a client to a lawyer are almost invariably associated with the protection of the client's legal rights and legal position. Francis Bacon said that "the greatest trust between man and man is the trust of giving Counsell."
The duty, therefore, of a lawyer not to divulge without the consent of his or her client confidential matters goes to the heart of the Anglo Saxon system of adversarial justice. Fox says that "absent the guarantee of confidentiality, critical discussions will be proscribed or circumscribed in a way that will impact directly on the ability of the lawyer to serve his or her client." In an adversarial system of justice, a great deal depends on the skills of the advocates for each party in the proceeding. In Upjohn v. United States, 449 U.S. 383, 389 (1981), the Supreme Court said that the attorney-client privilege was designed "to encourage full and free communications between attorne...