Snyder v. Value Rent-A-Car
| Decision Date | 07 July 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 99-0453.,99-0453. |
| Parties | Dale SNYDER and Rose Snyder, Petitioners, v. VALUE RENT-A-CAR, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Douglas H. Stein of Anania, Bandklayder, Blackwell & Baumgarten, Miami, for petitioners.
Richard M. Gomez of Law Offices of Roland Gomez, Miami Lakes, for respondent.
Petitioners, Dale Snyder and Rose Snyder, plaintiffs below in a personal injury action, seek certiorari review of the trial court's order which grants respondent's motion to compel production of Rose Snyder's diary and overrules petitioners' work product objections. We grant the petition, quash the trial court's order, and remand for an in-camera inspection of the diary.
This cause arose from an auto accident in which petitioner, Dale Snyder was struck by a vehicle owned by respondent. During the discovery phase of the proceedings, respondent requested production of a diary kept by petitioner, Rose Snyder. Petitioners objected to the production on the grounds of work product and attorney-client privilege.
Petitioners submitted an affidavit of Rose Snyder to the trial court in which she alleged that the diary entries were made in anticipation of litigation and to assist counsel in the preparation of the litigation. She stated that after the accident, she and her husband anticipated that they would file a lawsuit to recover for his injuries, so she kept the diary to document his medical appointments, care and condition, No counter-affidavits were filed on behalf of the respondent.
The trial court granted the motion to compel, requiring production of the diary. The trial court overruled the work product objection on the grounds that Rose Snyder's attorneys did not direct her to create the diary.
Certiorari lies to review trial court orders compelling production of discovery claimed to be privileged or otherwise protected as work product or attorney-client, as this would present the potential of a departure from the essential requirements of law which would cause material harm for which there is no adequate remedy on final appeal. See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Langston, 655 So.2d 91 (Fla.1995); Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage, 509 So.2d 1097 (Fla.1987); Coyne v. Schwartz, Gold, Cohen, Zakarin & Kotler, P.A., 715 So.2d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
Rule 1.280 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure governs discovery including requests for items which are work product, namely documents and tangible things prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or by or for that party's representative, including that party's agent or attorney. There is no requirement in this rule that for something to be protected as work product, it must be an item ordered to be prepared by an attorney. See, e.g., Barnett Bank v. Dottie-G. Dev. Corp., 645 So.2d 573 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Time Warner, Inc. v. Gadinsky, 639 So.2d 176 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).
Rule 1.280 (b)(3), provides that work product documents may be obtained only upon a showing that the party seeking discovery "has need of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Worley v. Cent. Fla. Young Men's Christian Ass'n, Inc.
...at 94 ; Coyne v. Schwartz, Gold, Cohen, Zakarin & Kotler, P.A., 715 So.2d 1021, 1022 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) )); Snyder v. Value Rent–A–Car, 736 So.2d 780, 781 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). The next issue we address is whether the order departs from the essential requirements of law. In general, “[p]art......
-
Hett v. Barron-Lunde
...documents before addressing whether a privilege applies, without conducting an in camera inspection. Snyder v. Value Rent–A–Car, 736 So. 2d 780, 782 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) ; see also Patrowicz v. Wolff, 110 So. 3d 973, 974-75 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (quashing an order compelling production of docum......
-
Millard Mall Servs., Inc. v. Bolda
...management department to be used to defend against potential litigation are protected as work-product); see Snyder v. Value Rent–A–Car, 736 So.2d 780, 781 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Internal investigative reports are also covered by the rule. See, e.g., Fed. Exp. Corp. v. Cantway, 778 So.2d 1052,......
-
Progressive Am. Ins. Co. v. Herzoff
...constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law subject to certiorari relief." (quoting Snyder v. Value Rent–A–Car, 736 So. 2d 780, 782 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) )). Mr. Herzoff countered that the documents in the 2015 claim file might be relevant to his lawsuit because the 2015 an......
-
Using The Work Product Doctrine
...litigation, or for use in trial. See also Aull v. Cavalcade Pen sion Plan, 185 F.R.D. 618 (D.Colo. 1998) and Snyder v. Value Rent-A-Car, 736 So.2d 780 (Fla.App. 1999). Cooper Health System v. Virtua Health, Inc. , 259 F.R.D. 208 (D.N.J. 2009). The plaintiff, a health care system, brought an......
-
Using the work product doctrine
...litigation, or for use in trial. See also Aull v. Cavalcade Pen sion Plan, 185 F.R.D. 618 (D.Colo. 1998) and Snyder v. Value Rent-A-Car, 736 So.2d 780 (Fla.App. 1999). Cooper Health System v. Virtua Health, Inc. , 259 F.R.D. 208 (D.N.J. 2009). The plaintiff, a health care system, brought an......
-
Using The Work Product Doctrine
...litigation, or for use in trial. See also Aull v. Cavalcade Pen sion Plan, 185 F.R.D. 618 (D.Colo. 1998) and Snyder v. Value Rent-A-Car, 736 So.2d 780 (Fla.App. 1999). Cooper Health System v. Virtua Health, Inc. , 259 F.R.D. 208 (D.N.J. 2009). The plaintiff, a health care system, brought an......