Caldwell v. District Court In And For The City And County Of Denver

644 P.2d 26 (Colo. 1982)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Ps brought this action in Denver District Court, contending that Hertz, Hill, and Weinschel (Ds) fraudulently concealed information and misrepresented facts in an earlier personal injury action wherein a summary judgment for Weinschel (D) was improperly granted and Hertz (D) was unjustly insulated from payment of damages for P's injuries. A car carrying Ps was struck by a second automobile owned by Hertz (D). The car had been rented by Weinschel (D) and was being operated by Baumgart (D) at the time of the accident. Weinschel (D) was not in the car. Baumgart (D) and Weinschel (D) were on a skiing vacation. After arriving in Vail, it became necessary to return to Denver to pick up two women who were joining them for their skiing holiday. Baumgart (D) departed and picked up the women and was involved in the auto accident while returning to Vail. Ps brought a negligence action against Ds. Ds attorney filed a motion for a summary judgment dismissing Weinschel (D) from the action. The motion was granted. Ps obtained a judgment against Baumgart (D), which awarded damages of $74,989.86 and $20,451.78. During discovery in the garnishment action, Ps came to a firm belief that Ds had committed fraud in defending the personal injury action. Ps filed a new action. Ps claimed that Ds withheld information and misrepresented facts regarding the relationship between Baumgart (D) Weinschel (D). These documents would have normally been privileged under attorney client privilege. Ds refused and Ps motion to compel production. The court denied the motion holding that the attorney client privilege protected them from disclosure. Ps filed a petition for relief in the nature of mandamus, asking us to direct the trial court to order the requested discovery.