Document: 329 U.S. 495 67 S.Ct. 385 91 L.Ed. 451 HICKMANv.TAYLOR et al. No. 47. Argued Nov. 13, 1946. Decided Jan. 1947. [Syllabus from pages 495-497 intentionally omitted] Mr.Abraham E. Freedman, of Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioner. Messrs. William I. Radner, Washington, D.C., and Samuel B. Fortenbaugh, Jr., respondents. Mr. Justice MURPHY delivered the opinion Court. 1 This case presents an important problem under Federal Rules Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, as to extent which a party may inquire into oral written statements witnesses, or other information, secured by adverse party's counsel in course preparation possible litigation after claim has arisen. Examination person's files records, including those resulting professional activities attorney, must be judged with care. It is not without reason that various safeguards have been established preclude unwarranted excursions privacy man's work. At same time, public policy supports reasonable necessary inquiries. Properly balance these competing interests delicate difficult task. 2 On February 7, 1943, tug 'J. M. Taylor' sank while engaged helping tow car float Baltimore & Ohio Railroad across Delaware River at Philadelphia. The accident was apparently unusual nature, cause it still being unknown. Five nine crew members were drowned. Three days later owners underwriters employed law firm, responden Fortenbaugh member, defend them against potential suits representatives deceased sue railroad damages tug. 3 A hearing held on March 4, before United States Steamboat Inspectors, four survivors examined. testimony recorded made available all interested parties. Shortly thereafter, privately interviewed took eye toward anticipated litigation; signed 29. also persons believed some information relating cases he memoranda what they told him. time when survivors, two had communication Ultimately claims presented five deceased; claims, however, settled litigation. fifth claimant, petitioner herein, brought suit federal court Jones Act November 26, naming defendants owners, individually partners, railroad. 4 One year later, filed 39 interrogatories directed owners. 38th interrogatory read: 'State whether any crews Tugs 'Philadelphia' vessel taken connection towing sinking Tug 'John Taylor'. 5 Attach hereto exact copies such if writing, oral, set forth detail provisions reports.' 6 Supplemental asked statements, reports concerning matter relative operation, tug, salvaging repair death deceased. If answer affirmative, then requested nature reports, memoranda. 7 through answered except 38 supplemental ones just described. While admitting taken, declined summarize contents. They did so ground requests called 'for privileged obtained litigation' constituted 'an attempt obtain indirectly counsel's private files.' claimed answering 'would involve practically turning over only complete files, but telephone records and, almost, thoughts counsel.' 8 In objections, statement gave informal deposition explaining circumstances statements. But expressly produce District Court Eastern Pennsylvania, sitting en banc, matters privileged. F.R.D. 479. decreed agent forthwith 'Answer Plaintiff's interrogatories; witnesses Defendants; state substance fact this Defendants learned included his Fortenbaugh's containing submit determination portions should revealed Plaintiff.' Upon their refusal, adjudged contempt ordered imprisoned until complied. 9 Third Circuit Appeals, reversed judgment 153 F.2d 212. here sought part 'work product lawyer' hence discovery Procedure. importance problem, engendered great divergence views among district courts,1 led us grant certiorari. 328 876, 66 1337. 10 pre-trial deposition-discovery mechanism 26 37 one most significant innovations Under prior practice, functions notice-giving issue-formulation fact-revelation performed primarily inadequately pleadings.2 Inquiry issues facts trial narrowly confined often cumbersome method.3 new rules, restrict pleadings task general invest process vital role trial. instruments now serve (1) device, along Rule 16, narrow clarify basic between parties, (2) device ascertaining facts, existence whereabouts issues. Thus civil trials courts no longer need carried dark. way clear, consistent recognized privileges, parties fullest knowledge trial.4 11 There initial question rules involved case. Petitioner, filing interrogatories, thought proceeding 33. That rule provides upon served.5 proceeded assumption its opinion, although order stated both 33 34 involved. establishes procedure whereby, motion showing good therefor notice permit inspection copying photographing designated documents, etc., privileged, constitute contain evidence material action are possession, custody control.6 12 felt crucial one. said, wanted witnesses. involved, least defending could used basis condemning failure disclose since applies addressed agents counsel. And said inapplicable trying see original document copy photograph it, within scope rule. concluded really person, not, examination purpose use evidence; deponent examined regarding matter, relevant subject pending action, defense examining party, existence, description, custody, condition location books, documents tangible things.7 13 difficulty light events transpired below. We believe, He simple solely individual contemplated 33, address counsel, Fortenbaugh. Nor direct either deposition; thus come operation. does appear record directing producetion question. Indeed, entered 34, like limited proceeding, thereby excluding agents. 14 seeking production gathered misconceived remedy. him dejuncts clearly cannot refuse attorney. Here prepared attorney make provision production, even permissible interrogatories. Moreover, foreclosed securing recourse take force materials subpoena duces tecum accordance 45. Holtzoff, 'Instruments Discovery Procedure,' 41 Mich.L.Rev. 205, 220. despite petitioner's faulty choice order, commanding Their refusal anomalous result holding possession compelled 34. 15 we deem unnecessary unwise rest our decision procedural irregularity, irregularity strongly urged disregarded little stage fails refuses pursuant 45 create integrated devices. stake devices collected wrong method destroy main thrust attempt. relieve responsibility dealing raised would inconsistent liberal atmosphere surrounding insist go empty formality pursuing right reestablish precisely confronting us. do mean say, there situations proceed specific decisive. present circumstances, purposes decision, material. Having noted proper procedure, accordingly turn attention underlying problem. 16 urging emphasizes Procedure designed enable discover true compel disclosure wherever found. inquiry epitomized privileged; applied broadly liberally possible, privilege limitation restricted narrowest bounds. premise attorney-client case, argues strictly confidential communications client issue third rather than clients, conclusion reached subjects 26. 17 As additional support result, prohibit give corporate defendant tremendous advantage plaintiff. injured employee insured person insurance company pull dark veil secrecy petinent can collect arises merely assertion large staff attorneys plaintiff, who intimate details By endowing immunity lawyer discovers duties, rights litigants drained vitality lawsuit becomes more battle deception search truth. 18 framing terms assisting plaintiffs unsatisfactory. concededly work disadvantage well plaintiffs. Discovery, words, one-way proposition. types behest corporate, plaintiff defendant. far transcends situation view limitless where particular kind might used. 19 agree, course, accorded broad treatment. No time-honored cry 'fishing expedition' inquiring opponent's case.8 Mutual essential To end, disgorge whatever possession. simply advances period preceding reducing possibility surprise. discovery, ultimate boundaries. indicated 30(b) (d) 31(d), limitations inevitably arise shown conducted bad aith manner annoy, embarrass oppress inquiry. 26(b) provides, further touches irrelevant encroaches domains privilege. 20 agree memoranda, mental impressions fall outside protected basis. delineate content courts. For purposes, suffices note protective cloak extend secures witness acting anticipation concern briefs, writings own prosecuting client's case; equally unrelated reflect attorney's impressions, conclusions, opinions legal theories. 21 impropriety invoking provide Petitioner ordinary request relevant, non-privileged adversaries whose identity known availability appears unimpaired. making searching inquiries opponents fatal accident, sworn best belief. Interrogatories to, during subsequent Full honest answers necessarily pertinent gleaned interviews makes suggestion, assume, incomplete dishonest answers. addition, free examine Inspectors. secure contained mind necessity indication denial unduly prejudice hardship injustice. aught appears, essence seeks already readily asking. 22 Court, objections request, commanded determine All petitioner, requirement showing, demonstration theory constituting communications. 23 neither nor oth r contemplates circumstances. because irrelevant, concepts rules.9 attempt, purported justification, personal recollections formed duties. such, falls arena contravenes orderly prosecution claims. Not theories justify 24 Historically, officer bound advancement justice faithfully protecting rightful clients. performing certain degree privacy, intrusion opposing Proper demands assemble sift considers prepare plan strategy undue needless interference. historical lawyers act framework system jurisprudence promote protect clients' interests. reflected, interviews, correspondence, beliefs, countless intangible ways—aptly though roughly termed Appeals (153 212, 223) 'Work lawyer.' Were open mere demand, much put down writing remain unwritten. An thoughts, heretofore inviolate, own. Inefficiency, unfairness sharp practices develop giving advice effect profession demoralizing. clients poorly served. 25 say adversary's cases. Where hidden file essentia one's properly had. Such might, admissible clues facts. Or useful impeachment corroboration. justified difficulty. precluded ideals stripped meaning. invading working burden rests invade establish adequate reasons order. burden, implicit constituted.10 30(b), presently written, gives judge requisite discretion allowed instant room operate favor why forced naked, demand finding recognizable insufficient sustained produce. 27 form believe production. conditions, forcing repeat write out deliver account adversary rise grave dangers inaccuracy untrustworthiness. legitimate served practice forces testify remembers saw fit witnesses' remarks. qualify corroborative less witness. standards suffer. Denial material, hindered opponents' position. Searching themselves reveal policy. Petitioner's frankly admits wants help himself sure overlooked nothing. exception activities. rare justifying matters, type. 29 fully appreciate w de-spread controversy case.11 hazy frontiers process. statute definitely prescribes otherwise, permitting unqualified right. When adopted, bar certainly contemplate processes opened scrutiny adversaries. interpret reach harsh result. 30 therefore affirm Appeals. 31 Affirmed. 32 JACKSON, concurring. concerns thirty-nine refused answer. persistence committed jail purge contempt. tugs vessel, demanded 'Attach authorized aspects 'discovery'. 35 primary advocated itself. too office indispensable parts administration justice. Law-abiding people nowhere else learn ever changing constantly multiplying behave redress wrongs. welfare tone prime consequence society, feel consequences urges secondarily certainly. 36 'Discovery' tools profession. traces back equity bill English Chancery seems forerunner Continental practice. See Ragland, Before Trial (1932) 13-16. Since 1848 draftsmen New York's Code better impetus expand opposition Bar happens plaintiff's unprecedented latitude strangely enough, amicus briefs several labor unions representing class. history movement broader actual experience chief extension specialize advance. Report Commission Administration York State (1934) 330, 331; 35, 36. two-edged sword decide doctrine extending class litigants. clear long access anything Cf. 41, 42. nullify client. principles real assistance consider first extreme aspect here, find calls conversations vessels other, 'set transcript creation being. introduce prove What, then, demanding counsel? Counsel candidly argument bases brief away old developed 'a wits common always proceeding. hardly intended perform borrowed adversary. 40 probable level lower 'battle wits.' I conceive demoralizing require Even recollection perfect, language permeated inferences. Every tried knows almost impossible fairly expressions emphasis testifies environment influence leading will departures respects. Whenever differ 'exact' delivered, lawyer's whipped impeach producing 'inexact' lose nothing saying, 'Here contradiction, gentlemen jury. know my telling truth, not.' Of scene repeated again. delivers branded deceiver afraid stand version witness's conversation him, credibility—perhaps witness, possibly dislikes reasons. partly role; invariably poor steps character it. regrets it; discourages seen done stories, self-defense. 42 whom believes biased, lying hostile get unfavorable meet? vouch credibility calling Perhaps side want call either, charge suppressi g never regarded reliable truthful. 43 supplied names interview himself. employee-witness tell story, he, too, Rules. disclosure—it contradicts unseemly disagreement 44 literal admit interpretation sustain court's So Congress 'Any * memorandum occurrence, event,' § 695, evidence, engineer's evidence. Palmer v. Hoffman, 318 109, 111, 63 477, 479, 87 645, 144 A.L.R. 719. measures background custom assumed wrote apply them. reviewed negligence allowing railroads others shield cross-examination. 'Such major change opens wide door avoidance cross-examination left implication.' page 114, 481. pointed there, 'several hundred years behind indicate reforms effect.' 115, beyond point. follow reasoning here. Certainly tradition up suggested authorize proposed. remains 477. think ordinarily departs statement. impossibility respond show available. Production governed 'Showing therefor' inspection, photographing. application made; right, cause. 46 affirmance court. 47 FRANKFURTER joins opinion. Advisory Committee Proposed Amendments (June, 1946), pp. 40—47; 433, 457—460. Moore's Practice (1945 Cum.Supp.), 26.12, 155—159; 210—212; Pike Willis, 'Federal Operation,' Univ. Chicago L.Rev. 297, 301—307. 'The weakness pleading means developing presenting lay total lack testing factual pleader's allegations denials.' Sunderland, Theory Pre-Trial 215, 216. (1932), ch. Proctice (1938), 26.02, 2445, 2455. Deposition-Discovery Col.L.Rev. 1179, 1436; Pike, Evidence,' Ill.L.Rev. 1. reads: or, corporation partnership association, thereof competent behalf. shall separately oath. them; submitting delivery unless court, shown, enlarges shortens time. Objections service thereof, motion; deferred determined, early practicable. may, leave party.' provides: 'Upon photographing, behalf moving papers, accounts, letters, photographs, objects, things, control; entry land property control inspecting, measuring, surveying, object operation thereon. specify place, taking photographs prescribe conditions just.' follows: '(a) Depositions May Taken. jurisdiction served, instance purposes. attendance provided rules. prison prescribes. (b) Scope Examination. Unless otherwise (d), t things having facts.' 'One arguments objection idea mutual—that tie opponent definite position.' 303. concept include 'All purpose—but sole purpose—of advisers proofs, draft pleadings, indorsement *, notes given publicly papers bona fide solicitor not. Reports company's servant, routine, desirable subsequently sent him; prepared, disclosed.' Odgers Pleading (12th ed., 1939), p. 264. Order 31, 1, Supreme 1883, Annual Practice, 1945, 519, discussion compilation Wigmore Evidence (3d 1940), 2319, 618—622, notes. explicit requirements obtaining another documents. 1946); 433. 44—47; 459, 460; Symposium 1946 Conference 403; Armstrong, 'Report Recommending Amendments,' 339, 353—357.

Category: 4