Litigation

Witness Statements as Work Product: Cal Supremes To Decide

By Bruce Nye

In March, CBL posted here about the three conflicting appellate cases related to whether or not witness statements were protected work product.  This discussion came about because of a Court of Appeal's decision in Coito v. Superior Court of Stanislaus County (March 4, 2010) ___ Cal.App.4th ___ (F057690).  There, the court held that witness statements were not protected by the work product doctrine and were discoverable.  As mentioned at the time, the dissent urged the California Supreme Court to review and settle this issue.  

And yesterday, the Supremes accepted the challenge, voting unanimously to grant the petition for review.  This means we should get resolution of the issue some time in the next year or two.  It also means that Coito is no longer citeable authority.  Instead, until the case is decided, litigants, and the trial courts, have their choice between Kadelbach v. Amaral (1973) 31 Cal.App.3d 814 (verbatim statements generally discoverable) and Nacht & Lewis Architects, Inc. v. Superior Court (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th 214 (statements not discoverable -- in fact, who litigant chose to statementize not even discoverable). 

We'll monitor this and let you know what happens.

Full post as published by CalBizLit on June 10, 2010 (boomark / email).