Tag: discovery

Dec 2, 2020

Intervening IL Workers’ Comp Insurer is Not a “Party” to the Underlying Tort Suit

Circuit Court’s Contempt Order for Failure to Abide by Discovery Order is Erroneous An Illinois trial court committed error when it found an intervening workers’ compensation insurer in contempt for...

Intervening IL Workers’ Comp Insurer is Not a “Party” to the Underlying Tort Suit Intervening IL Workers’ Comp Insurer is Not a “Party” to the Underlying Tort Suit
Mar 18, 2015

Colorado Employer and Carrier Need Not Disclose if They Made Gifts to State Comp Judges

A Colorado workers’ compensation insurer and an employer’s counsel need not respond to a discovery request made by a workers’ compensation claimant that they disclose whether any of them had...

Colorado Employer and Carrier Need Not Disclose if They Made Gifts to State Comp Judges Colorado Employer and Carrier Need Not Disclose if They Made Gifts to State Comp Judges
Oct 1, 2013

Alabama: Work-Product Rule Protects Post-Injury Accident Report from Discovery

Last Friday, a divided Supreme Court of Alabama, applying the work-product rule, determined that a post-accident investigation report, conducted and prepared by an employer’s safety director and a co-worker and...

Alabama: Work-Product Rule Protects Post-Injury Accident Report from Discovery Alabama: Work-Product Rule Protects Post-Injury Accident Report from Discovery
Jul 12, 2012

Texas: Communication by Comp Carrier’s Counsel to Insured Employer Not Protected by Attorney—Client Privilege

With one justice dissenting, the Supreme Court of Texas recently held that in a bad faith action brought by an injured employee against a workers’ compensation insurer, the attorney—client privilege...

Texas: Communication by Comp Carrier’s Counsel to Insured Employer Not Protected by Attorney—Client Privilege Texas: Communication by Comp Carrier’s Counsel to Insured Employer Not Protected by Attorney—Client Privilege