Gutshall v. New Prime, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that evidence used solely for impeachment falls within the broad scope of Rule 26 and must be disclosed
• finding evidence discoverable despite the party’s intention to only use it for impeachment purposes because impeachment evidence “falls within the broad scope of Rule 26(b)(1)”
• disclosure of surveillance materials required when defendant intended to use those materials for impeachment purposes at trial
• “The work product doctrine is not a ‘privilege,’ but a sort of ‘qualified immunity’ from discovery, originally established in Hickman v. Taylor, and ultimately codified in Rule 26(b)(3).”
• “New Prime prepared, or commissioned the preparation of, the surveillance materials in anticipation of trial in this case. Consequently, those materials constitute ‘work product’ that New Prime ordinarily would not be compelled to produce”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).