In the Interest of R.L.R.

Juvenile Law Center, along with the Florida Association of Counsel for Children and the National Association of Counsel for Children, wrote an amicus brief on behalf of R.L.R., a minor, who had confided his whereabouts to his attorneys ad litem with the understanding that the information would be kept confidential and not be provided to the Court or to the Child Welfare Agency, who was seeking the information.

Juvenile Law Center argued that the attorney-client relationship depends on the client’s ability to communicate confidentially with his counsel and that children in dependency proceedings are entitled to attorneys who owe the same duty of confidentiality to their child-clients as they would to an adult client. R.L.R.’s attorneys ad litem are duty-bound by the Florida Constitution, the Rules of Professional Conduct, and Rules of Evidence to maintain the confidentiality of the information shared by their client.

Juvenile Law Center urged the appellate court to preserve the attorney-client privilege for communications between attorneys ad litem and their child-clients in dependency proceedings.

The Florida Third District Court of Appeal issued an opinion on June 20, 2013 that quashed the trial court's order compelling the court-appointed attorneys ad litem to breach their attorney-client privilege and disclose the whereabouts of R.L.R. The court found that R.L.R. would be "more likely to seek legal advice and be more willing to work toward a successful outcome if he can trust his AALs not to breach his confidences. In this circumstance it is altogether clear that protecting the attorney-client privilege protects the administration of justice."