Court Opinion

ID: 9526830
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:24:45.693391+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:22:28.540607
License: Public Domain

CARTER, Justice
(concurring specially).
This is a discovery dispute involving Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.503(3). I concur with the majority’s conclusion that Beverly Brandon’s request for discovery should have been allowed but not for the reasons set forth in the opinion of the court. I agree with Justice Cady that Betty, Neuman & McMann, L.L.P. had no reason to believe that that firm or any member thereof had an attorney-client relationship with Beverly Brandon with regard to their pursuit of the subrogation action. Her lack of interest in that action had been expressly confirmed by another attorney who was representing her interests.
I am satisfied, however, that the protection against discovery of work product contained in rule 1.503(3) should not be applied in the present case where the actions of the parties in creating the work product are among the issues in the litigation.