Work-Product Protection and Experts' Documents: The Ninth Circuit Strengthens the “Because of” Standard and Extends Protection to Dual Purpose Documents

Abstract

Since the Supreme Court applied the work-product privilege to documents created by an attorney's representatives, so long as the documents were created in anticipation of litigation, the lower courts have attempted to interpret this application. The various circuit courts have addressed this issue as it relates to documents serving both litigation and nonlitigation purposes. Most recently, in November 2003 the Ninth Circuit joined the First, Second, Third, Seventh, Eighth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuits when it adopted the rule that an expert's documents may be protected when they are prepared “because of the prospect of litigation.” In contrast, the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Circuits, Tenth and D.C. District Courts have constructed a stricter interpretation. Further, the Ninth Circuit's recent holding in United States v. Torf (In re: Grand Jury Subpoena) 350 F. 3d 1010 (9th Cir. 2003) sheds some more light on the scope of the work-product protection as it applies to environmental consultant's documents created in anticipation.