{"id":1770,"date":"2016-11-23T11:20:05","date_gmt":"2016-11-23T17:20:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.illinoisinjurylawyerblog.net\/?p=1226"},"modified":"2018-04-12T12:37:37","modified_gmt":"2018-04-12T17:37:37","slug":"plaintiffs-experts-conclusions-protected-work-product-doctrine","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/plaintiffs-experts-conclusions-protected-work-product-doctrine\/","title":{"rendered":"Plaintiff\u2019s Expert\u2019s Conclusions Protected by Work Product Doctrine"},"content":{"rendered":"

In a recent case<\/a>, a man sued the maker of his utility terrain vehicle (UTV) after the UTV overturned, and the roof failed, causing his injuries. The man designated four expert witnesses to testify in his case at trial. For one of the experts he designated, the man said the expert would testify as to the UTV\u2019s performance, the forces involved in the accident, and factors affecting\u00a0the UTV\u2019s performance. The man did not explain the expert\u2019s analysis or his conclusions on the issues in the case. Shortly afterward, the man told the defendant and the court that he was no longer going to use the expert as one of his witnesses. However, the defendant then requested to have the expert\u2019s deposition taken, seemingly to find out what his conclusions were.<\/p>\n

The plaintiff\u00a0objected, arguing that the expert\u2019s opinions and conclusions were protected by the \u201cwork product doctrine\u201d\u2014a doctrine that protects materials prepared for or by an attorney in anticipation of litigation. The defendant argued the plaintiff\u00a0had waived any protection under the work product protection because, as an expert, the\u00a0conclusions would have been disclosed.<\/p>\n

The trial court agreed with the defendant, finding that the plaintiff had waived the protections of the work product doctrine by designating the expert as a witness. However, the state\u2019s supreme court reversed. The court concluded that a party designating an expert witness by itself is not a waiver of the work product doctrine. It also concluded that in this case, the man\u2019s actions did not waive the work product privilege. As a result, the expert\u2019s conclusions were protected under the work product doctrine, and the plaintiff\u00a0did not have disclose them to the defendants.<\/p>\n

Continue reading \u2192<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In a recent case, a man sued the maker of his utility terrain vehicle (UTV) after the UTV overturned, and the roof failed, causing his injuries. The man designated four expert witnesses to testify in his case at trial. For one of the experts he designated, the man said the expert would testify as to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[19,15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1770","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-dangerous-products","category-personal-injury-legal-theories"],"yoast_head":"\nPlaintiff\u2019s Expert\u2019s Conclusions Protected by Work Product Doctrine — Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog — November 23, 2016<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In a recent case, a man sued the maker of his utility terrain vehicle (UTV) after the UTV overturned, and the roof failed, causing his injuries. The man — November 23, 2016\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/plaintiffs-experts-conclusions-protected-work-product-doctrine\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Plaintiff\u2019s Expert\u2019s Conclusions Protected by Work Product Doctrine — Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog — November 23, 2016\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"In a recent case, a man sued the maker of his utility terrain vehicle (UTV) after the UTV overturned, and the roof failed, causing his injuries. The man — November 23, 2016\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Moll Law Group\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Plaintiff\u2019s Expert\u2019s Conclusions Protected by Work Product Doctrine — Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog — November 23, 2016","description":"In a recent case, a man sued the maker of his utility terrain vehicle (UTV) after the UTV overturned, and the roof failed, causing his injuries. The man — November 23, 2016","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/plaintiffs-experts-conclusions-protected-work-product-doctrine\/","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Plaintiff\u2019s Expert\u2019s Conclusions Protected by Work Product Doctrine — Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog — November 23, 2016","twitter_description":"In a recent case, a man sued the maker of his utility terrain vehicle (UTV) after the UTV overturned, and the roof failed, causing his injuries. The man — November 23, 2016","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Moll Law Group","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/plaintiffs-experts-conclusions-protected-work-product-doctrine\/","url":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/plaintiffs-experts-conclusions-protected-work-product-doctrine\/","name":"Plaintiff\u2019s Expert\u2019s Conclusions Protected by Work Product Doctrine — Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog — November 23, 2016","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2016-11-23T17:20:05+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-12T17:37:37+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/53d2eb37d5d0cdb46ac61abacf05ce90"},"description":"In a recent case, a man sued the maker of his utility terrain vehicle (UTV) after the UTV overturned, and the roof failed, causing his injuries. The man — November 23, 2016","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/plaintiffs-experts-conclusions-protected-work-product-doctrine\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/plaintiffs-experts-conclusions-protected-work-product-doctrine\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/plaintiffs-experts-conclusions-protected-work-product-doctrine\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Plaintiff\u2019s Expert\u2019s Conclusions Protected by Work Product Doctrine"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/","name":"Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Lawyer Blog","description":"Published by Illinois Injury and Mass Tort Attorney \u2014 Moll Law Group","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/53d2eb37d5d0cdb46ac61abacf05ce90","name":"Moll Law Group","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0febdc96ea554e620e775358f9d7e4fc56616188dfd2bb21b18c2fed4bd185a0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0febdc96ea554e620e775358f9d7e4fc56616188dfd2bb21b18c2fed4bd185a0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Moll Law Group"}}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1770","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1770"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1770\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1977,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1770\/revisions\/1977"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1770"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1770"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.molllawgroup.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1770"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}