Federal District Court refuses to shield internal statement and insurance record from disclosure under work-product privilege, finding the privilege must be specifically asserted and contested materials should be submitted for in camera review.

Addressing a motion to compel brought by the plaintiff, the court reviewed the defendant transportation company’s work-product objection to disclosure of the driver’s statement and the contents of its insurance and claims file. Though the court did not reject the privilege claims out of hand, it importantly noted numerous hurdles and pre-requisites for the objecting party, including an adequately detailed privilege log and specific objections, as opposed to claims of “relevance and privilege . . . made in the abstract.” The court determined that it would itself review the statement in question and the portions of the insurance claims file the defendants claim were privileged for purposes of determining what the court would deem privileged or subject to disclosure. Given the private and confidential nature of insurance claims files, it is relevant that the court would conduct such an in camera review as opposed to simply determining that an insurance claims file is protected except for those contents that were prepared or obtained in the ordinary course of business, such as evidence from the scene, medical records, and other materials that would not be exclusive to an insurance claims file.

^{Case Law Alerts, 4th Quarter, October 2022 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2022 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}