Cited by

Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 274 (1966).

parties who claim through the same deceased client, regardless of whether the claims are by testate or intestate succession or by inter vivos transaction.” Although the purpose of the attorney-client privilege is to encourage full disclosure of information between an attorney and his client by guaranteeing the inviolability of their confidential communications, Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 274 (1966), the basis for the exception in Rule 502(d)(2) is that “all reason for asser

Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 273 (1966) (citing 8 J. WlGMORE, Evidence §§ 2292, 2327-2329, at 554, 634-41 (McNaughten rev. 1961)).

Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 273 (1966) (citing 8 J. Wigmore, Evidence §§ 2292, 2327-2329, at 554, 634-41 (McNaughten rev. 1961)).

*15 “The common law rule that confidential communications between a client and an attorney are privileged and protected from inquiry is recognized and enforced in this jurisdiction.” Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 273 (1966) (quotation omitted).

Robbins v. Kalwall Corp., 120 N.H. 451, 453 (1980); Hartford Accident &c. Co. v. Cutter, 108 N.H. 112, 114 (1967); Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 278 (1966).

The lawyer’s work must have formed an essential step in the procurement of the data which the opponent seeks, and he must have performed duties normally attended to by attorneys.” Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 274 (1966).

The lawyer’s work must have formed an essential step in the procurement of the data which the opponent seeks, and he must have performed duties normally attended to by attorneys.” Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 274, 220 A.2d 751, 755 (1966).

.” Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 275, 220 A.2d 751, 756 (1966); see Super.

We have held that the communications and relations between attorney and client are protected from disclosure by what was known at common law as the attorney-client privilege, Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 273, 220 A.2d 751, 754 (1966), and by the attorney work product doctrine, id.

Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 274, 220 A.2d 751, 755 (1966) (document not invested with attorney-client privilege, merely by delivery from client to attorney).

“The rules of evidence which would govern privileged matters at trial govern such matters *846 when they arise during discovery.” Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 273, 220 A.2d 751, 754-55 (1966) (quoting 23 Am.

Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 278, 220 A.2d 751, 758 (1966).

Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 273, 220 A.2d 751, 754 (1966).

Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 276, 220 A.2d 751, 756-57 (1966).

Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 220 A.2d 751 (1966); Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 (1947); United States v. Nobles, 422 U.S. 225 (1975).

If he is not expected to testify, his information and opinions are still discoverable so long as a showing is made that “relevant facts are unobtainable by other means, or are obtainable only under such conditions of hardship as would tend unfairly to prejudice the party seeking discovery....” Id.; Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 275, 220 A.2d 751, 756 (1966); Muder v. Bentley, 109 N.H. 71, 72, 242 A.2d 396 (1968).

The position of the defendant in seeking discovery of the reports is that the condition of the refrigerator may have changad since the inspections of plaintiffs’ experts and that all of their reports should thus be discoverable in order to “contribute to the orderly dispatch of judicial business.” Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 278, 220 A.2d 751, 753 (1966); RSA 491:App. R 60 (e) (Supp. 1972).

Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 N.H. 271, 277, 220 A.2d 751, 758 (1966); Scontsas v. Citizens Insurance Co., 109 N.H. 386, 388, 253 A.2d 832 -33 (1969); see Stephenson v. Stephenson, 111 N.H. 189, 194, 278 A.2d 351, 355 (1971).

Shelley v. Landry, 97 N.H. 27, 79 A.2d 626 (1951); Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State, 107 *119 N.H. 271, 220 A.2d 751 (1966).