MacK

MacK v. Superior Court

Good Law
1968 Cal. App. LEXIS 1938·259 Cal. App. 2d 7·66 Cal. Rptr. 280
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 14, 1968Civ. 24998California1,099 words

Opinion

Opinion

Christian, J.

Petitioners, landowner-defendants in an eminent domain proceeding, seek a writ of prohibition to restrain respondent court from enforcing an order requiring petitioners to disclose, in answer to interrogatories, the following information about a real estate appraisal obtained by petitioners’ former attorney: (1) the appraiser’s name and address; (2) the date he was hired; (3) whether he rendered an opinion of the fair market value of the property sought to be condemned; and (4) the appraiser’s opinion of the fair market value of the property. In opposition to real party in interest State of California’s motion in the superior court to compel answers to these interrogatories, petitioners filed their joint declaration, under penalty of perjury, asserting that their former attorney did hire a real estate appraiser to assist him in forming an opinion about the case. The declaration continued:

Nevertheless the superior court ordered petitioners to answer.

Petitioners claim the protection of the statutory privilege covering an attorney’s work product. See McCoy, California Civil Discovery Work Product of Attorneys (1966) 18 Stan.L. Rev. 783 for a review of the context of case law in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.