Tobacco Documents - Order of MN Court of Appeals (December 26, 1995)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
The State of Minnesota, by Hubert H.
Humphrey, III, its Attorney General,
and Blue Cross and
Blue Shield of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Philip Morris Incorporated, et al., B.A.T. Industries, P.L.C.,
| O R D E R
#CX-95-2536 |
Considered and decided by Toussaint, Chief Judge, Randall, Judge, and Peterson, Judge.
BASED UPON THE FILE, RECORD AND PROCEEDINGS HEREIN, AND FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
Petitioners seeks a writ of prohibition or mandamus, for relief from a November 1, 1995 discovery order. The petition does not address the criteria for mandamus, and it appears that petitioners are seeking a writ of prohibition. Petitioners seek oral argument on the matter. Product Liability Council Inc. and Minnesota Chamber of Commerce move for acceptance of an amicus brief. The brief was submitted with the motion, and acceptance will not delay proceedings in this court.
To obtain a writ of prohibition, petitioners must establish that the district court has ordered disclosure of information that is clearly not discoverable. Mampel v. Eastern Heights State Bank, 254 N.W.2d 375, 377 (Minn. 1977). The district court is authorized to order discovery of work-product materials under certain circumstances. Minn. of R. Civ. P. 26.02(c). The court made specific findings that (a) the computerized databases include fields containing objective information, (b) release of the specified information will not reveal the impressions, opinions, or theories of counsel, and (c) respondents have met the standards for disclosure. The district court found unpersuasive the petitioners' argument that the mere selection of documents for inclusion in the database would reveal attorney strategies.
After a review of the authorities cited by all parties, the specific findings made by the district court, and the documents submitted for in camera review, we conclude that petitioners have not met the standard justifying issuance of a writ of prohibition.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
- The petition for writ of prohibition is denied.
- Petitioners' request for oral argument is denied.
- The amicus brief is accepted and ordered filed.
Dated: December 26, 1995
BY THE COURT
/s/ Edward Toussaint
Chief Justice