Ronald K. Spivey v. Walter Zant, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the former client was entitled to “all portions of [his attorney’s] file relevant to the proceedings in the district court”
• “On its face [the work product doctrine] does not give an attorney the right to withhold work product from his own client...”
• Habeas corpus petitioner is entitled to ik at tne nat anniv in etuaton in which the client seeks access to documents or other tangible things created during course of attorney's repre- sentation
• “[T]he work product docuirle does not apply to the situation in which a client seeks access to documents or other tangible things created or amassed by his attorney during the course of the representation.”
• interpreting Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(3)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).