Spencer v. Traders & General Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there is no work product immunity for documents prepared in the regular course of business rather than for purposes of the litigation
• explaining that the privilege does not apply “simply because it is made by or to a person who happens to be a lawyer”
• noting the applicability of the work product privilege is distinct from the applicability of the attorney-client privilege
• describing attorney-client privilege as only applying to “confidential communications between an attorney and his client”
• affirming district court’s refusal to grant work-product protection on similar facts
• affirming district court's refusal to grant work-product protection on similar facts

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).