This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Dodson (P) sued Persell (D) for negligence from an auto accident. P propounded interrogatories to discover whether surveillance had taken place, whether photographs or movies were taken and if so the time and lace and substance of their content. D objected to this discovery and the production of the films or photographs as D claimed they were work product. That objection was upheld by the court. The evidence was admitted at trial over objection. D got the verdict and P appealed. The Appeals court affirmed. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.