The appellant insurer appealed a master’s order compelling answers to discovery refusals and production of documents from its claims file in litigation arising from a propane facility explosion and a coverage dispute.
The insurer asserted solicitor-client privilege and litigation privilege over memoranda, meeting notes, and claims file materials generated during the coverage investigation.
The court held that an appeal from a master’s decision is not a de novo hearing and is limited to correcting errors of law, wrong principles, or palpable and overriding errors.
The insurer failed to establish an evidentiary basis for either solicitor-client privilege or litigation privilege because no affidavit evidence demonstrated that the documents contained legal advice or were created for the dominant purpose of litigation.
The master’s order requiring production was therefore upheld.
