The plaintiffs sought review of the denial of the order, which was granted, and the Court of Appeals affirmed denial of the motion. Dietz v. Doe, 80 Wn. App. 785, 911 P.2d 1025 (1996). We granted review.
ΒΆ10 Whether a privilege has been waived is reviewed de novo. Steel v. Olympia Early Learning Ctr., 195 Wash. App. 811, 822, 381 P.3d 111 (2016) (waiver of attorney-client privilege reviewed de novo (citing Pappas v. Holloway , 114 Wash.2d 198, 205, 787 P.2d 30 (1990) )); Lodis , 172 Wash. App. at 854, 292 P.3d 779 (waiver of psychologist-client privilege reviewed de novo (citing Dietz v. Doe , 80 Wash. App. 785, 788, 911 P.2d 1025 (1996) )).
September 4, 1996. Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, March 8, 1996, 80 Wn. App. 785. Granted September 4, 1996.
But, whether Lodis waived the privilege is a question of law we review de novo. See Dietz v. Doe, 80 Wash.App. 785, 788, 911 P.2d 1025 (1996), rev'd,131 Wash.2d 835, 935 P.2d 611 (1997).