Heidebrink v. Moriwaki
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtPearson, J.
The issue presented by this case is whether the statement of an insured to his or her insurance company is protected by the attorney-client privilege or the work product immunity rule. The trial court ruled the statement was not discoverable. The Court of Appeals reversed and ordered production of the statement. We now reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals on the basis that the statement is protected by the work product immunity rule codified in CR 26(b)(3).
I
This lawsuit arose from a multiple car collision on a state highway near Moses Lake, Washington, on March 15, 1982. Respondents…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Southern Railway Company v. Carl Talmadge LanhamCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Republic Gear Company v. Borg-Warner CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967
- Alltmont v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Dawson v. DalyWashington Supreme Court · 1993
- Limstrom v. LadenburgWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Soter v. Cowles Publishing Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2007
- Soter v. Cowles Pub. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2007
- Pappas v. HollowayWashington Supreme Court · 1990
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.