ACA Insurance Co. v. Rice
Filing
31
ORDER re 19 Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents. Motion is DENIED as moot with respect to documents 10, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21; DENIED as withdrawn with respect to documents 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 13; and DENIED with respect to documents 1, 14, and 15. by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 3/11/13.(bnbcd, )
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland
Civil Action No. 12-cv-03080-WYD-BNB
ACA INSURANCE CO., an Indiana corporation d/b/a AAA Fire & Casualty Insurance
Company,
Plaintiff,
v.
ANNE RICE,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
This matter arises on Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel
Production of Documents [Doc. # 19, filed 2/11/2013] (the “Motion to Compel”). The Motion
to Compel originally sought the production of 16 documents withheld by the plaintiff on claims
of attorney-client privilege and/or work product immunity and listed by the plaintiff on its
privilege log. After the Motion to Compel was filed, the plaintiff voluntarily produced six of the
disputed documents (## 10, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21) and a portion of a seventh (# 14). At the
hearing on the Motion to Compel, the defendant withdrew her request with respect to seven of
the documents (## 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 13) based on the plaintiff’s response to the Motion to
Compel. At issue now is the propriety of the plaintiff’s refusal to produce documents ## 1 and
15 and certain pages of # 14.
The disputed documents were submitted for in camera review. I have reviewed them and
find that they contain a request for legal advice or legal advice in connection with the plaintiff’s
response to the defendant’s appraisal request (# 1); a request for legal advice or legal advice after
receiving the appraisal award (# 14); and a request for legal advice or legal advice concerning
insurance appraisals under Colorado law as applicable to this case (# 15). The documents are
subject to the attorney-client privilege. They do not address nor do they constitute the
adjustment of a claim.
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Compel [Doc. # 19] is:
(1)
DENIED as moot with respect to documents ## 10, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21;
(2)
DENIED as withdrawn with respect to documents ## 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 13; and
(3)
DENIED with respect to documents ## 1, 14, and 15.
Dated March 11, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
