Freshwater v. Freshwater

654 So. 2d 1271, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 5338, 1995 WL 296324
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Freshwater v. Freshwater. Read the opinion of the Court — 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8875
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 17, 1995·No. No. 95-962·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

We grant the wife’s petition for a writ of certiorari and quash the order overruling her objections to the husband’s requests for production. The husband requested production of the wife’s diaries; at the hearing the court was informed that the wife’s attorney had directed the wife to keep a diary in connection with this litigation. We hold that these materials are protected by work product privilege. Dodson v. Persell, 390 So.2d 704 (Fla.1980); Roe v. Roe, 253 N.J.Super. 418, 601 A.2d 1201 (App.Div.1992) (diary written at attorney’s direction in connection with litigation privileged); In re Pretino, 150 Misc.2d 371, 567 N.Y.S.2d 1009 (N.Y.Sur. 1991) (same). Furthermore, the husband made no showing as to these materials that he was “unable without undue hardship to obtain the substantial equivalent of the materials by other means.” Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.280(b)(3); Roe; Pretino. The order under review is quashed and the cause is remanded with instructions to enter an order sustaining wife’s objections to the production of the requested documents to the extent that the documents were prepared at the request of the wife’s counsel.

Certiorari granted; order quashed; cause remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Freshwater v. Freshwater, 654 So. 2d 1271, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 5338, 1995 WL 296324 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

654 So. 2d 1271 (Freshwater v. Freshwater) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dodson v. Persell
390 So. 2d 704 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1980)
Roe v. Roe
601 A.2d 1201 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1992)
In re the Estate of Pretino
150 Misc. 2d 371 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1991)