Hellard v. Mid Century Insurance Company et al, No. 4:2019cv00043 - Document 44 (N.D. Okla. 2019)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Frank H McCarthy ; granting 25 Motion to Quash (tjc, Dpty Clk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Hellard v. Mid Century Insurance Company et al Doc. 44 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA DUSTIN HELLARD, an Individual, Plaintiff, v. MID CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY, d/b/a FARMERS INSURANCE, a Foreign Corporation, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 19-CV-43-GKF-FHM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant’s Motion to Quash or Modify Subpoenas to Non Party Law Firms, [Dkt. 25], is before the court for decision. The matter has been fully briefed, [Dkts. 31, 32], and the court has conducted an in camera review of the documents at issue. Defendant seeks protection from discovery of documents from two law firms hired by Defendant regarding Plaintiff’s uninsured motorist claim. Defendant contends the documents are covered by the attorney/client privilege or attorney work product protection. Plaintiff responds that the documents are not protected from discovery because the law firms were involved in the business of investigating and evaluating the Plaintiff’s insurance claim. Based on the court’s in camera review of the documents, the court finds that the law firms were providing legal services and advice as opposed to business services. The documents are therefore protected from discovery by the attorney/client privilege and/or Dockets.Justia.com work product protection. Defendant’s Motion to Quash or Modify Subpoenas to Non Party Law Firms, [Dkt. 25], is GRANTED. So ordered this 25th day of November, 2019. 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
