David Green

The appellant rock climbing facility appealed an Associate Justice's order requiring its representative to answer 16 refused questions on discovery in a personal injury action.

The questions related to hypothetical scenarios, witness statements, and the subjective interpretation of a liability waiver.

The Superior Court allowed the appeal in part, finding that questions requiring legal analysis, irrelevant opinions, or unfair presumptions did not need to be answered.

However, questions regarding the objective feasibility of safety measures and the subjective understanding of the waiver were ordered to be answered in writing to avoid unfair traps for a lay deponent.

The defendant in a solicitor's negligence action appealed a master's order requiring him to answer five questions refused at his examination for discovery.

The Superior Court allowed the appeal in part.

The court held that the defendant did not have to answer questions asking him to identify primary and secondary legal sources regarding testamentary capacity, as this improperly required a fact witness to conduct legal research and provide an expert opinion on the standard of care.

However, the court upheld the master's order requiring the defendant to answer questions about his understanding of his duty to ascertain testamentary capacity and regarding his professional liability insurance coverage.