Utah’s Attorney Work-Product Privilege: The Basics & Sources
Elements[1]
Three essential requirements for materials to be protected by the work product doctrine under Rule 26(b)(3) of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure:
1. The material must consist of documents or tangible things,
2. Prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial
- Applies in ADR and administrative actions
3. By or for another party or by or for that party’s representative.
Gold Standard, Inc. v. American Barrick Res. Corp., 801 P.2d 909, 910 (Utah 1990).
Purpose of the Privilege.
- Featherstone v. Schaerrer, 2001 UT 86, ¶33, 34 P.3d 194 (“The work product privilege derives from dual policy goals aimed at ‘preserving the adversary system’ and ‘providing attorneys with a zone of privacy permitting effective client advocacy,’ and it thus follows that to the extent these goals are trampled on, the scope of the attorney work product privilege may be eroded.”)
- United States v. Nobles, 422 U.S. 225, 238 (1975) (“[T]he work-product doctrine shelters the mental processes of the attorney, providing a privileged area within which he can analyze and prepare his client’s case.”).
- In re Air Crash Disaster at Sioux City, 133 F.R.D. 515, 519 (N.D.Ill.1990) (“Work product includes ‘[s]ubject matter that relates to the preparation, strategy, and appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of an action, or to the activities of the attorneys involved, rather than to the underlying evidence.’”).
Bases of the Privilege.
Codification of Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 511–12 (1947) (the material “falls outside the arena of discovery. . . . Not even the most liberal of discovery theories can justify unwarranted inquiries into the files and the mental impressions of an attorney.”)
Rule 26 of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.
(b)(5) Trial preparation materials. A party may obtain otherwise discoverable documents and tangible things prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or by or for that other party’s representative (including the party’s attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer, or agent) only upon a showing that the party seeking discovery has substantial need of the materials and that the party is unable without undue hardship to obtain substantially equivalent materials by other means. In ordering discovery of such materials, the court shall protect against disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of an attorney or other representative of a party.
(b)(6) Statement previously made about the action. A party may obtain without the showing required in paragraph (b)(5) a statement concerning the action or its subject matter previously made by that party. Upon request, a person not a party may obtain without the required showing a statement about the action or its subject matter previously made by that person. If the request is refused, the person may move for a court order under Rule 37. A statement previously made is (A) a written statement signed or approved by the person making it, or (B) a stenographic, mechanical, electronic, or other recording, or a transcription thereof, which is a substantially verbatim recital of an oral statement by the person making it and contemporaneously recorded.
(b)(7) Trial preparation; experts.
(b)(7)(A) Trial-preparation protection for draft reports or disclosures. Paragraph (b)(5) protects drafts of any report or disclosure required under paragraph (a)(4), regardless of the form in which the draft is recorded.
(b)(7)(B) Trial-preparation protection for communications between a party’s attorney and expert witnesses. Paragraph (b)(5) protects communications between the party’s attorney and any witness required to provide disclosures under paragraph (a)(4), regardless of the form of the communications, except to the extent that the communications:
(b)(7)(B)(i) relate to compensation for the expert’s study or testimony;
(b)(7)(B)(ii) identify facts or data that the party’s attorney provided and that the expert considered in forming the opinions to be expressed; or
(b)(7)(B)(iii) identify assumptions that the party’s attorney provided and that the expert relied on in forming the opinions to be expressed.
(b)(7)(C) Expert employed only for trial preparation. Ordinarily, a party may not, by interrogatories or otherwise, discover facts known or opinions held by an expert who has been retained or specially employed by another party in anticipation of litigation or to prepare for trial and who is not expected to be called as a witness at trial. A party may do so only:
(b)(7)(C)(i) as provided in Rule 35(b); or
(b)(7)(C)(ii) on showing exceptional circumstances under which it is impracticable for the party to obtain facts or opinions on the same subject by other means.
(b)(8) Claims of privilege or protection of trial preparation materials.
(b)(8)(A) Information withheld. If a party withholds discoverable information by claiming that it is privileged or prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial, the party shall make the claim expressly and shall describe the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced in a manner that, without revealing the information itself, will enable other parties to evaluate the claim.
(b)(8)(B) Information produced. If a party produces information that the party claims is privileged or prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial, the producing party may notify any receiving party of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a receiving party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has and may not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved. A receiving party may promptly present the information to the court under seal for a determination of the claim. If the receiving party disclosed the information before being notified, it must take reasonable steps to retrieve it. The producing party must preserve the information until the claim is resolved.
Rule 26(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.[2]
(3) Trial Preparation: Materials.
(A) Documents and Tangible Things. Ordinarily, a party may not discover documents and tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or its representative (including the other party’s attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer, or agent). But, subject to Rule 26(b)(4), those materials may be discovered if:
(i) they are otherwise discoverable under Rule 26(b)(1); and
(ii) the party shows that it has substantial need for the materials to prepare its case and cannot, without undue hardship, obtain their substantial equivalent by other means.
(B) Protection Against Disclosure. If the court orders discovery of those materials, it must protect against disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of a party’s attorney or other representative concerning the litigation.
(C) Previous Statement. Any party or other person may, on request and without the required showing, obtain the person’s own previous statement about the action or its subject matter. If the request is refused, the person may move for a court order, and Rule 37(a)(5) applies to the award of expenses. A previous statement is either:
(i) a written statement that the person has signed or otherwise adopted or approved; or
(ii) a contemporaneous stenographic, mechanical, electrical, or other recording—or a transcription of it—that recites substantially verbatim the person’s oral statement.[3]
(4) Trial Preparation: Experts.
(A) Deposition of an Expert Who May Testify. A party may depose any person who has been identified as an expert whose opinions may be presented at trial. If Rule 26(a)(2)(B) requires a report from the expert, the deposition may be conducted only after the report is provided.
(B) Trial-Preparation Protection for Draft Reports or Disclosures. Rules 26(b)(3)(A) and (B) protect drafts of any report or disclosure required under Rule 26(a)(2), regardless of the form in which the draft is recorded.
(C) Trial-Preparation Protection for Communications Between a Party’s Attorney and Expert Witnesses. Rules 26(b)(3)(A) and (B) protect communications between the party’s attorney and any witness required to provide a report under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), regardless of the form of the communications, except to the extent that the communications:
(i) relate to compensation for the expert’s study or testimony;
(ii) identify facts or data that the party’s attorney provided and that the expert considered in forming the opinions to be expressed; or
(iii) identify assumptions that the party’s attorney provided and that the expert relied on in forming the opinions to be expressed.
(D) Expert Employed Only for Trial Preparation. Ordinarily, a party may not, by interrogatories or deposition, discover facts known or opinions held by an expert who has been retained or specially employed by another party in anticipation of litigation or to prepare for trial and who is not expected to be called as a witness at trial. But a party may do so only:
(i) as provided in Rule 35(b); or
(ii) on showing exceptional circumstances under which it is impracticable for the party to obtain facts or opinions on the same subject by other means.
(E) Payment. Unless manifest injustice would result, the court must require that the party seeking discovery:
(i) pay the expert a reasonable fee for time spent in responding to discovery under Rule 26(b)(4)(A) or (D); and
(ii) for discovery under (D), also pay the other party a fair portion of the fees and expenses it reasonably incurred in obtaining the expert’s facts and opinions.
(5) Claiming Privilege or Protecting Trial-Preparation Materials.
(A) Information Withheld. When a party withholds information otherwise discoverable by claiming that the information is privileged or subject to protection as trial-preparation material, the party must:
(i) expressly make the claim; and
(ii) describe the nature of the documents, communications, or tangible things not produced or disclosed—and do so in a manner that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable other parties to assess the claim.
(B) Information Produced. If information produced in discovery is subject to a claim of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation material, the party making the claim may notify any party that received the information of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information if the party disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly present the information to the court under seal for a determination of the claim. The producing party must preserve the information until the claim is resolved.
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 16(a)(2).
Information Not Subject to Disclosure. Except as permitted by Rule 16(a)(1)(A)-(D), (F), and (G), this rule does not authorize the discovery or inspection of reports, memoranda, or other internal government documents made by an attorney for the government or other government agent in connection with investigating or prosecuting the case. Nor does this rule authorize the discovery or inspection of statements made by prospective government witnesses except as provided in 18 U.S.C. §3500.
Utah Rules of Prof. Conduct, Rule 1.6.
The principle of client-lawyer confidentiality is given effect by related bodies of law: the attorney-client privilege, the work-product doctrine and the rule of confidentiality established in professional ethics. The attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine apply in judicial and other proceedings in which a lawyer may be called as a witness or otherwise required to produce evidence concerning a client. The rule of client-lawyer confidentiality applies in situations other than those where evidence is sought from the lawyer through compulsion of law. The confidentiality rule, for example, applies not only to matters communicated in confidence by the client but also to all information relating to the representation, whatever its source. A lawyer may not disclose such information except as authorized or required by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.
Statutes.
Utah Code Ann. § 63G-2-305(18) (Effective 07/01/14)(GRAMA).
“The following records are protected if properly classified by a governmental entity:. . .
(18) records prepared for or by an attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer, employee, or agent of a governmental entity for, or in anticipation of, litigation or a judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative proceeding;”
Restatement of the Law (3rd) Governing Lawyers.
§ 87. Lawyer Work-Product Immunity
(1) Work product consists of tangible material or its intangible equivalent in unwritten or oral form, other than underlying facts, prepared by a lawyer for litigation then in progress or in reasonable anticipation of future litigation.
(2) Opinion work product consists of the opinions or mental impressions of a lawyer; all other work product is ordinary work product.
(3) Except for material which by applicable law is not so protected. Work product is immune from discovery or other compelled disclosure to the extent stated in §§ 88 (ordinary work product) and 89 (opinion work product) when the immunity is invoked as described in § 90.
§ 88. Ordinary Work Product
When work product protection is invoked as described in § 90, ordinary work product, (§ 87(2)) is immune from discovery or other compelled disclosure unless either an exception recognized in §§ 91-93 applies or the inquiring party:
(1) has a substantial need for the material in order to prepare for trial; and
(2) is unable without undue hardship to obtain the substantial equivalent of the material by other means.
[1] Utah Court’s use the term “privilege” when referring to the doctrine. Featherstone v. Schaerrer, 2001 UT 86, ¶33, 34 P.3d 194 (2001). Some courts, however, refer to it as a “doctrine” or “immunity” rather than “privilege.” Some resist terming it a privilege because the protection is not absolute—although “core” or “opinion” work product that encompasses the mental impressions, conclusions, opinion, or legal theories of an attorney or other representative of a party concerning the litigation is generally afforded near absolute protection from discovery. See In re Cendant Corp. Sec. Litig., 343 F.3d 658, 663 (3d Cir. 2003).
[2] In diversity cases the courts apply federal law to resolve work-product claims and state law to resolve attorney-client claims. See Frontier Ref., Inc. v. Gorman-Rupp Co., Inc., 136 F.3d 695 n.10 (10th Cir. 1998) (“Unlike the attorney client privilege, the work product privilege is governed, even in diversity cases, by a uniform federal standard embodied in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3)….”); United Coal Cos. v. Powell Constr. Co., 839 F.2d 958, 966 (3d Cir. 1988); In re Powerhouse Licensing, LLC, 441 F.3d 467, 472 (6th Cir. 2006); Baker v. General Motors Corp., 209 F.3d 1051, 1053 (8th Cir. 2000); Fed. R. Evid. 501; Jewell v. Holzer Hosp. Found., Inc., 899 F.2d 1507, 1513 (6th Cir. 1990).
[3] Miles v. M/V Mississippi Queen, 753 F.2d 1349 (5th Cir. 1985) (error where district court declined to compel production of Plaintiff’s own prior witness statement obtained by defendant’s investigators investigating other claims used at trial to impeach plaintiff—exception to work-product protection).
