A Video Explaining the Work Product Protection and Insurance Investigations

Published: March 11, 2021, 2:18 p.m.

b'

The work product doctrine was recognized in Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S.  495 (1947) which established a qualified privilege for certain materials  prepared by an attorney acting for his or her client in anticipation of  litigation:  Were such materials open to opposing counsel on mere demand, much of  what is now put down in writing would remain unwritten. An attorney\\u2019s  thoughts, heretofore inviolate, would not be his own. Inefficiency,  unfairness and sharp practices would inevitably develop in the giving of  legal advice and in the preparation of cases for trial. The effect on  the legal profession would be demoralizing. And the interests of the  clients and the cause of justice would be poorly served.  Attorneys must be allowed to do their work in private. If opponents were  to discover their thoughts, reasoning, and research, the effect on  legal scholarship and the profession would be devastating. No attorney  could consider both the strong and weak sides of the client\\u2019s case for  fear of disclosing the findings to the opponent.  In National Farmers Union Property & Casualty Co. v. District Court,  718 P.2d 1044, 1047- 1048 (Colo. 1986).the Colorado Supreme Court also  looked to out-of-state authority and found support there. The court held  that a memorandum prepared by outside counsel to inform an insurer\\u2019s  general counsel of results of a claims investigation, which included  interviews with employees of the insured, was not protected by the  attorney work product privilege because the dominant purpose of the  investigation was not to provide legal advice. The court stated that the  insurer could not \\u201cavail itself of the protection afforded by the work  product doctrine simply because it hired attorneys to perform the  factual investigation into whether the claim should be paid. Finding  that the attorneys were performing the same function that an adjuster  would perform, the court declared the memorandum an ordinary business  record that must be produced.  \\xa9 2021 \\u2013 Barry Zalma  Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to service as an  insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance  claims handling, insurance bad faith and insurance fraud almost equally  for insurers and policyholders. He also serves as an arbitrator or  mediator for insurance related disputes. He practiced law in California  for more than 44 years as an insurance coverage and claims handling  lawyer and more than 52 years in the insurance business. He is available  at http://www.zalma.com and zalma@zalma.com.  Mr. Zalma is the first recipient of the first annual Claims Magazine/ACE  Legend Award.  Over the last 53 years Barry Zalma has dedicated his life to insurance,  insurance claims and the need to defeat insurance fraud. He has created  the following library of books and other materials to make it possible  for insurers and their claims staff to become insurance claims  professionals.  Go to the podcast Zalma On Insurance at https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma;  Follow Mr. Zalma on Twitter at https://twitter.com/bzalma; Go to Barry  Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/c-262921; Go to Barry  Zalma on YouTube-  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg;Go to the  Insurance Claims Library \\u2013  https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library/Read posts from Barry  Zalma at https://parler.com/profile/Zalma/posts; and Read last two  issues of ZIFL here.

\\n\\n--- \\n\\nSupport this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/barry-zalma/support'