In the case of Estate of Paterno v. NCAA, 2017 Pa. Super. 247 (Pa. Super. July 25, 2017 Stabile, Panella, Dubow, J.J.) (Op. by Stabile, J.), the Pennsylvania Superior Court addressed the attorney work product doctrine.
In a decision which affirmed in
part and reversed in part the lower court’s decision, the appellate court ruled
that the discovery of non-verbatim attorney notes and memoranda concerning
interviews should not have been allowed by the lower court.
The Superior Court noted that such items, including
attorney summaries, are totally protected by the attorney work product
privilege. The court more specifically
stated that the attorney work product is protected as long as the items involve
attorney conclusions and mental impressions, whether or not such paperwork was
prepared in anticipation of litigation.
In its decision, the court also
noted that the protections of the attorney work product doctrine are broader
under state law then federal law in this respect.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.