The defendants brought a motion to compel the plaintiff to answer questions refused during an examination for discovery, specifically seeking production of an adverse costs insurance policy (ACP).
The plaintiff argued the ACP was a blanket policy held by his law firm and protected by solicitor-client privilege.
The court dismissed the motion, following precedent that an ACP held in the name of a law firm, rather than the party, is not producible under Rule 30.02(3) or discoverable under Rule 31.06(4).
