Alta Health Strategies, Inc. v. Kennedy
United States District Court for the District of Utah
790 F. Supp. 1085 (1992)
- Written by Mary Phelan D'Isa, JD
Facts
Alta Health Strategies, Inc. (Alta Health) (plaintiff) brought a motion to compel answers to three of its interrogatories to Kennedy and O’Donnell (defendants). The interrogatories asked Kennedy and O’Donnell to state every basis for their claim that one of Alta Health’s—or its agents’— statements constituted an admission. Alta Health contended that the interrogatories were proper under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 33(a)(2), which permits discovery of opinions and contentions that relate to fact and to the application of law to fact. Kennedy and O’Donnell objected to the interrogatories and resisted the motion to compel. Kennedy and O’Donnell claimed attorney-work-product protection under FRCP 26(b)(3). Kennedy and O’Donnell specifically fought the interrogatories under the part of the rule that protects an attorney’s thoughts and mental impressions from discovery.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Anderson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 781,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.