The plaintiff contractor brought a motion to compel the defendant transit commission to produce an unredacted copy of a project assessment report prepared by a third-party consultant.
The defendant claimed litigation privilege over the redacted portions, arguing they were prepared in reasonable contemplation of litigation regarding delay claims.
The court found that while litigation was reasonably contemplated, the defendant failed to establish that the dominant purpose of the redacted portions was litigation, as the report was primarily commissioned to assess project status, scheduling, and budget to expedite completion.
The motion was granted, and the defendant was ordered to produce the unredacted report.
