Federal District Court orders disclosure of driver-facing video, finding it is not protected work product nor excludable from discovery based on relevancy.

In this wrongful death action, at issue was a dual-facing dashboard camera that recorded not only front-facing video but video of the driver himself at the time of and prior to the collision. Driver- or in-vehicle-facing camera capabilities are often a double-edged sword. They often play a role in passenger vehicle cases where the cause of action relates to an on-board incident, but the only value of the camera on this eighteen-wheeler truck would appear to be the reaction and/or appreciation of the events by the insured driver. The defendants argued a work-product/anticipation of litigation privilege, which the court rejected as well as generally noted existing case law that the “tape here depicts the incident.” It is this issue that appears underdeveloped and underexplored in this case, and this decision may provide a teachable moment where the defense strategy in discovery may be better focused on a question of relevancy and a possible ‘fishing expedition’—i.e., clearly, video depicting an accident can be relevant, but seeing the driver may be of no probative value absent allegations and proof of the driver’s distraction.

^{Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2022 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2022 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}