The discretion to exempt a party from pre-trial disclosure of surveillance video under UCPR r 393 requires balancing the trend towards full disclosure (facilitating settlement, efficiency and just determination) against the forensic value of surprise in unmasking exaggeration or fraud, the extent of apparent exaggeration, and the importance of credibility to the case. UCPR r 393(2) implicitly abolishes common law litigation privilege for surveillance videos. An application for exemption from disclosure of both the video and associated medical reports must be brought under both UCPR r 393 and r 224.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.