Healthtrust, Inc.-The Hospital v. Behan

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Healthtrust, Inc.-The Hospital v. Behan

638 So. 2d 635, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6684, 1994 WL 317811

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 6, 1994

DocketNo. 94-0718

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 638 So. 2d 635 (Healthtrust, Inc.-The Hospital v. Behan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Healthtrust, Inc.-The Hospital v. Behan, 638 So. 2d 635, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6684, 1994 WL 317811 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We grant the petition for writ of certiorari to quash an order allowing the deposing of an expert witness. We concur with petitioners that their claim of work product privilege has not been overcome by respondent by a showing of compelling necessity for this discovery. See Anchor Nat. Financial Services, Inc. v. Smeltz, 546 So.2d 760 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Agri-Business, Inc. v. Bridges, 897 So.2d 394 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 407 So.2d 1102 (Fla.1981). If the witness sought to be deposed on the particular medical issue is listed as an expert for trial on this issue, then he would be subject to deposition pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(4)(A). However, he has not been as yet designated as an expert by the petitioners, and we should not overlook the specific requirements of the rules by anticipating that the expert will be called.

GUNTHER, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We grant the petition for writ of certiorari to quash an order allowing the deposing of an expert witness. We concur with petitioners that their claim of work product privilege has not been overcome by respondent by a showing of compelling necessity for this discovery. See Anchor Nat. Financial Services, Inc. v. Smeltz, 546 So.2d 760 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Agri-Business, Inc. v. Bridges, 897 So.2d 394 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 407 So.2d 1102 (Fla.1981). If the witness sought to be deposed on the particular medical issue is listed as an expert for trial on this issue, then he would be subject to deposition pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(4)(A). However, he has not been as yet designated as an expert by the petitioners, and we should not overlook the specific requirements of the rules by anticipating that the expert will be called.

GUNTHER, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

638 So. 2d 635, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6684, 1994 WL 317811, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/healthtrust-inc-the-hospital-v-behan-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack