OH · rules
Ohio Evid.R. 502
Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product; Limitations on Waiver
The following provisions apply, in the circumstances set out, to disclosure of a communication or
other information covered by the attorney-client privilege or work-product protection.
(A) Disclosure made in an Ohio proceeding or to an Ohio office or agency; scope of waiver
When a disclosure is made in an Ohio proceeding or to an office or agency of an Ohio state,
county, or local government that waives the attorney- client privilege or work-product
protection, the waiver extends to an undisclosed communication or information in any
proceeding only if:
(1) The waiver is intentional;
(2) The disclosed and undisclosed communications or information concern the
same subject matter; and
(3) They ought in fairness to be considered together.
(B) Inadvertent disclosure
When made in an Ohio proceeding or to an office or agency of an Ohio state, county, or
local government, the disclosure does not operate as a waiver in any proceeding if:
(1) The disclosure is inadvertent;
(2) The holder of the privilege or protection took reasonable steps to prevent
disclosure; and
(3) The holder promptly took reasonable steps to rectify the error, including (if
applicable) following Ohio Civ.R. 26(B)(8)(b).
(C) Disclosure made in another jurisdiction
When the disclosure is made in a proceeding in a federal court or the court of another state
and is not the subject of a court order concerning waiver, the disclosure does not operate
as a waiver in an Ohio proceeding if the disclosure:
(1) Would not be a waiver under this rule if it had been made in an Ohio
proceeding; or
(2) Is not a waiver under the law governing the state or federal proceeding
where the disclosure occurred.
(D) Controlling effect of a court order
An Ohio court may order that the privilege or protection is not waived by disclosure
connected with the litigation pending before the court, in which event the disclosure is also
not a waiver in any other proceeding.
(E) Controlling effect of a party agreement
An agreement on the effect of a disclosure in an Ohio proceeding is binding only on the
parties to the agreement, unless it is incorporated into a court order.
(F) Definitions
In this rule:
(1) "Attorney-client privilege" means the protection that applicable law
provides for confidential attorney-client communications; and
(2) "Work-product protection" means the protection that applicable law
provides for tangible material (or its intangible equivalent) prepared in anticipation
of litigation or for trial.
History
Effective Date: July 1, 2022 Staff Note (July 1, 2022 Amendment) Rule 502 is modeled closely on Fed.R.Evid. 502 adopted by Congress in 2008, and comparable provisions adopted in other states. It seeks to harmonize practice across jurisdictions, particularly in dealing with electronically stored information. The rule does not alter state or federal law on whether a communication or information is protected under attorney-client privilege or work-product immunity as an initial matter. Ohio previously adopted a “claw-back” provision in Civ.R. 26(B)(8)(b), but that rule does not control whether disclosure constitutes a waiver in that or another proceeding. This rule fills the gap, providing a predictable and uniform set of standards under which parties can determine the consequences of disclosure.
Provenance
- Source
- supremecourt.ohio.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-14
- Edition
- 2026-09-14
- Content hash
e7f4de82e7fcf8cf07800b74bf883756d4c1d59ee4e5a215bbe1169a6a1209c4
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.