AMERICAN LADDER & SCAFFOLD COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, PETITIONER,
v.
MONTAGUE EADIE AND PAUL DIGIROLAMO, RESPONDENTS

Fla. 3d DCA | 1960-04-28
No. 60-26
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON, J., concur.
120 So. 2d 65 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1960) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

This case concerns whether an expert's report, prepared for an attorney, is privileged as attorney work product. The court found that even if it were privileged, the privilege was waived when the defendant submitted an affidavit from the expert in support of a motion for summary judgment.


Holding

The court did not definitively rule on whether the expert's report was privileged. However, it held that even if it were privileged, the privilege was waived when the defendant filed an affidavit from the expert in support of its motion for summary judgment.


Key Quotes

“Petitioner, the defendant below, contends that the expert's examination and report and the conclusions he reached are privileged as their attorney's work product.”

This quote states the defendant's argument for why the expert's information should not be discoverable.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The plaintiffs sought to depose an expert hired by the defendant's counsel to examine a ladder involved in an accident. The defendant argued this info…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
CARROLL, CHAS., Judge.

*66CARROLL, CHAS., Judge.

On certiorari we are asked to review an order of the circuit court of Dade County, entered before trial in a common law action and dealing with discovery.

The trial court ruled that plaintiffs could take the discovery deposition of an expert who had been hired by the defendant’s counsel to examine a ladder involved in the accident out of which the case arose. Petitioner, the defendant below, contends that the expert’s examination and report and the conclusions he reached are privileged as their attorney’s work product. Respondents contend the matter is not thus privileged. We are shown no decisions of courts of this state to guide us on that question. But it need not be decided here, because if the privilege existed, it was waived when the defendant filed an affidavit by the expert regarding the ladder in support of its unsuccessful motion for summary judgment. See Savino v. Luciano, Fla.1957, 92 So.2d 817; Knaust Bros. v. Goldschlag, D.C.S.D.N.Y.1939, 34 F.Supp. 87; Munzer v. Swedish American Line, D.C.S.D.N.Y.1940, 35 F.Supp. 493; Wild v. Payson, D.C.S.D.N.Y.1946, 7 F.R.D. 495; Mason v. New York Cent. R. Co., D.C.W.D.N.Y.1949, 9 F.R.D. 334; United States v. Kelsey-Hayes Wheel Co., D.C.E.D.Mich.1954, 15 F.R.D. 461; Schwartz v. Travelers Insurance Co., D.C.S.D.N.Y. 1954, 17 F.R.D. 330; F. A. R. Liquidating Corporation v. Brownell, D.C.D.Del.1956, 140 F.Supp. 535.

Certiorari denied.

HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Shell v. State Rd. Dep't of Fla., 135 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 1961)
    …ion of whether or not the opinions and reports of expert witnesses retained by a party preparatory to litigation constitute a work product has not been specifically decided .in this state. See American Ladder and Scaffold Company v. Eadie, Fla.App., 120 So. 2d 65, wherein the point was raised but not resolved, the case being decided on other grounds. A review of the applicable Florida authorities cited above on the subject of work product, however, indicates that in an ordinary case data compiled or prepare…
  • …ent there could be areas for examination of the employed adjuster outside of privileged work product and allowed discovery subject to the right to object if it led into privileged ground. In American Ladder & Scaffold Company v. Eadie, Fla.App.1960, 120 So. 2d 65, the attorneys who employed an expert to examine and report to them on property involved in a case used his evidence in the form of an affidavit in support of an unsuccessful motion for summary judgment. We there held that such use of the expert’s e…
  • Dade Cnty. v. Bosch, 133 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)
    …mmon law action which quashed a notice of taking deposition of an expert witness of the respondent. In causes similar to this, this court and others have assumed jurisdiction of such writs; American Ladder & Scaffold Company v. Eadie, Fla.App. 1960, 120 So. 2d 65; City of Sarasota v. Colbert, Fla. App. 1957, 97 So. 2d 872. The trial court granted the motion to quash the deposition of expert witness, Dr. George Schmitt, upon a motion pointing out that the doctor was an expert with whom counsel for the plain…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw