Court Opinion

ID: 9667803
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 01:55:25.435061+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:40.530917
License: Public Domain

CANTU, Justice,
concurring.
I agree that the writ of mandamus should be denied. However, I would not categorize the documents relator sought to exclude from discovery under the bad faith claim as privileged.
If they were not discoverable at the time of hearing it was because the documents were not yet relevant to a triable claim. Relator concedes as much.
Nevertheless, relator argues that respondent abused its discretion by failing to conduct an in camera inspection of the documents. As noted in the court’s opinion, none of the documents were ever introduced in evidence at an evidentiary hearing. Nor is there any indication that the documents claimed to be privileged were ever segregated from those claimed to be irrelevant.
In the absence of a statement of facts it is impossible to determine what, if anything, was requested of respondent.
I would deny the writ based upon relator’s total failure to demonstrate that respondent abused its discretion in any manner. If anything, the record and admissions of counsel during argument demonstrate relator’s failure to invoke respondent’s protective powers.