Florida Eye Clinic v. Gmach
14 So. 3d 1044 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (May)
The district court upheld the trial judge’s ruling that documents detailing complaints of infections and other investigations at the hospital that were created in anticipation of litigation were discoverable. The district court found these documents to be “fact” work product as opposed to “opinion” work product, which placed them within the realm of documents made discoverable by Article X, section 25 of the Florida Constitution. The decision placed an emphasis on the fact that the hospital’s attorney had never reviewed these documents and did not contain any of the attorney’s mental impressions.