Judge: Mark H. Epstein, Case: 24SMCV01675, Date: 2024-11-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24SMCV01675    Hearing Date: November 22, 2024    Dept: I

This is a narrow motion.  Plaintiff was injured at defendant’s store.  Defendant did an investigation after the fact, the court assumes at counsel’s behest.  Plaintiff seeks the name of the person doing the investigation and contact information.  Defendant objects on the basis of work product.

Were this an attempt to get the report, the court might side with the defense here, at least absent some further showing.  But were that the case, there would have to be some briefing as to whether the report is covered by work product and whether there is some need to obtain or produce it anyway.  But all that is being sought right now is the name of the author and contact information.  The name of the person doing the report is not privileged nor is it the subject of work product.  It might or might not lead to the discovery of admissible evidence—it depends on what follows—but the name itself is unprotected.  The contact information can be, for these purposes, through counsel, but then counsel is undertaking the burden of ensuring contact even if this person fires or quits.  (Or, should that occur, counsel could discharge that duty by providing contact information at that time.)

If it turns out that this person has no information other than what witnesses told her or him, and if the actual witnesses are all disclosed through other interrogatory responses, then it might well be that this person never testifies and the report never comes out.  But it could also be that this person has first-hand knowledge, or it could be that some of the information must be turned over because the actual witnesses are no longer available.  Or there could be other issues.

For now, the court will GRANT the motion.  The individual’s name will be provided within 5 court days.  Contact information will be provided as well unless counsel undertakes to provide contact on legitimate request.  Wisely, neither party sought sanctions.  The court appreciates that good judgment.