Shook v. CITY OF DAVENPORT, IOWA

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that party seeking discovery, at the very least, must make an independent discovery effort to obtain the same information
• explaining the doctrine is referred to as a privilege but is a “qualified immunity” from discovery
• “[S]o much of the work product that reflects the mental impressions or opinions of the lawyer is, for all practical purposes, absolutely immune from discovery.”
• “[T]he determinative issue is whether the primary motivating purpose for the creation of the materials in question was to prepare for litigation.” (citing Ashmead, 336 N.W.2d at 201)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).