1E9Ct5D

CONNECTICUTHenry M. Beck, Jr.Joseph G. Fortner, Jr.Kaitlin M. HumbleHALLORAN & SAGE, LLPOne Goodwin Square225 Asylum StreetHartford, CT 06103Phone (860) 522-6103www.halloransage.combeck@halloransage.comfortner@halloransage.com1. Does your state recognize an exemption from discovery (or a privilege) forpre-suit investigation materials? Is there a key to preserving thisexemption/privilege (i.e. involvement of counsel)?Connecticut recognizes the work product doctrine, under which materials otherwisediscoverable and prepared “in anticipation of litigation” may be obtained “only upon ashowing that the party seeking discovery has substantial need of the materials in thepreparation of the case and is unable without undue hardship to obtain the substantialequivalent of the materials by other means.” Conn. Practice Book §13-3(a).Connecticut has long held that counsel’s involvement is “dispositive” to claims thatinvestigation material is protected by the work product doctrine, Stanley Works v. NewBritain Redevelopment Agency, 155 Conn. 86, 95, 230 A.2d 9 (1967), and theattorney’s activities must “have been conducted with a view to pending or anticipatedlitigation,” form an essential step in the development of the materials, and constituteduties normally attended to by attorneys. Id. Compare Winot v. Dragon, 1995 WL107321 (Conn. Super. 1995) (ordering disclosure of statements to employer riskmanager). While, as in other jurisdictions, a court may order portions disclosed wherethe requesting party establishes that the investigatory materials cannot be duplicated,see Page v. DiMaggio Plumbing & Heating Inc., 2000 WL 1861849 (Conn. Super.2000), courts are to prevent disclosure of “the mental impressions, conclusions,opinions, or legal theories of an attorney or other representative of a party concerningthe litigation.” Conn. Practice Book § 13-3(a). In addition, a specific, limited statutorybar to disclosure does exist under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a-17b for written opinions ofhealth care providers concerning evidence of medical negligence.2. What is your state’s rule with regard to the discoverability of written orrecorded statements taken during investigation of an incident?Under Connecticut Practice Book §13-3(b), parties may obtain “without the showingrequired under [§13-3(a)], discovery of the party’s own statement and of anynonprivileged statement of any other party concerning the action or its subject matter.”