- 92 -
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.
The attorney work-product doctrine generally protects materials
prepared in anticipation of litigation. See In re Sealed Case,
146 F.3d 881, 885-887 (D.C. Cir. 1998); Branerton Corp. v.
Commissioner, supra at 198; P.T. & L. Constr. Co. v.
Commissioner, supra at 408.
Where an attorney has prepared a document in anticipation of
litigation, the document will be protected from discovery only to
the extent that it contains opinions, judgments, and thought
processes of counsel as opposed to purely factual materials. See
In re Sealed Case, supra at 888. We recognize that the Zelisko
memorandum may have been prepared in part in anticipation of
litigation. In this regard, we permitted Brunswick to redact
portions of the document deemed to be privileged. However, the
portion of the Zelisko memorandum that we ordered to be disclosed
does not qualify for protection from disclosure under the
attorney work-product doctrine inasmuch as it consists of a
factual account of a meeting between Zelisko and representatives
of Merrill Lynch and is bereft of material that could be
characterized as Zelisko’s legal opinion or judgment.
Page: Previous 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011