- 11 -
Accordingly, the Sporck holding has been interpreted to
require that the attorney’s mental impressions would be revealed
by the disclosure of the documents selected by an attorney in
contemplation of litigation. For instance, the defense attorney
in Sporck selected a limited quantity of documents, which fit in
a folder. Conceivably, such a discrete selection from a universe
consisting of more than 100,000 documents could have disclosed
the attorney’s mental impression regarding the defense of and
preparation for a deposition. In stark contrast, petitioner’s
defense attorney selected 100,000 pages of documents from a
larger universe of documents. Given the huge volume of otherwise
discoverable documents, we are constrained from concluding that
the mental impressions of petitioner’s defense attorney could be
gleaned or discerned if the documents were revealed to a third
person.
In the case before us, the prosecuting attorney selected
10,000 pages and petitioner’s defense attorney selected 100,000
pages from a larger universe of documents maintained by the
prosecuting attorney. Given the large volume of documents
(pages) involved, there is little or no likelihood that the
defense attorney’s mental impressions would be discernable.
We are also cognizant that the case before this Court is a
civil proceeding and that the parties are urged and required to
exchange documents and to stipulate them in preparation for
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011