Austin v. BARNETT BK. OF SOUTH FLA.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that where privilege is asserted, the trial court should inspect the discovery requested in camera even though the petitioner’s assertion of a privilege was untimely
• “Where a claim of privilege is asserted, the trial court should hold an in camera inspection to review the discovery requested and determine whether assertion of the privilege is valid.”
• \[R]ule 1.380(d) does not require timely objection to privileged matters.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).