Opinion ID: 2555874
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Prefatory Statements.

Text: The second category involves statements prepared for possible use in a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding, regardless of whether the [statement] has been filed. Adams, 288 Md. at 8, 415 A.2d at 295. For instance, in Adams, a husband and wife entered into a separation agreement, whereby the wife would receive physical and legal custody of the children and the father visitation rights. See Adams, 288 Md. at 2, 415 A.2d at 292. Later, the wife began to doubt the propriety of the father's visitation. See id. She sent her children to see a psychiatrist, who concluded ultimately that the father had abused one of the children, and that he was `an ill man and in definite need of psychiatric treatment.' Adams, 288 Md. at 2, 415 A.2d at 292-93. The wife sought modification of the visitation rights on that basis. See Adams, 288 Md. at 2, 415 A.2d at 293. The father alleged that the psychiatrist defamed him. See Adams, 288 Md. at 2-3, 415 A.2d at 293. Concluding that an absolute privilege protected the statements by the psychiatrist, the Adams Court reasoned that his statements were published in a document which [wa]s prepared for possible use in connection with a pending judicial proceeding. . . . Adams, 288 Md. at 4, 415 A.2d at 294. Any other holding would permit a potential plaintiff to say, `I do not bring the action against you for what you said in the witness-box, but I bring the action against you for what you told the solicitor you were about to say in the witness-box.' Adams, 288 Md. at 7, 415 A.2d at 295 (quoting Watson v. M'Ewan, (1905) A.C. 480(HL)). The `public policy which renders the protection of witnesses necessary. . . must as a necessary consequence involve that which is a step towards and is part of the administration of justice namely, the preliminary examination of witnesses to find out what they can prove.' Id. (quoting Watson ).