Gocial v. Independence Blue Cross

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 there is a privilege log, it is the trial court’s responsibility to “rule on the relevance of each item ... or explain why the privileges raised were inapplicable”
• holding that appellant's “colorable claim” of attorney-client privilege justified immediate appellate review
• requiring that the trial court render individualized rulings for each specific or discrete category of document at issue
• holding the collateral order doctrine permitted interlocutory review where a party claimed work product and attorney-client privilege protections
• concluding that trial court erred where “[d]espite the existence of the privilege log, the trial court did not rule on the relevance of each item or explain why the privileges raised were inapplicable. Rather, the court simply deemed the entire log discoverable”
• remanding for the trial court to explain its rulings with regard to relevance and privilege

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).