Witness statements recorded or taken in writing by attorneys or their representatives aren’t privileged work product and, therefore, are open to discovery, a divided California appellate court ruled Thursday.

Surprisingly, the justices, including the dissenter, took the opportunity to harshly criticize a 14-year-old appellate ruling out of Sacramento that held just the opposite. The majority called it “cursory” and the dissent said the 1996 holding went “too far.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]