{"id":36612,"date":"2008-03-26T16:35:41","date_gmt":"2008-03-26T21:35:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/content.findlaw-admin.com\/ability-legal\/uncategorized\/discovery-of-insurance-policy.html"},"modified":"2008-03-26T16:35:41","modified_gmt":"2008-03-26T21:35:41","slug":"discovery-of-insurance-policy","status":"publish","type":"corporate","link":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/litigation-disputes\/discovery-of-insurance-policy.html","title":{"rendered":"Discovery of Insurance Policy"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

This article was edited and reviewed by FindLaw Attorney Writers<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n | Last reviewed\n

\n \n <\/i>\n Legally Reviewed\n <\/summary>\n\n
\n

This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy, clarity, and style by FindLaw\u2019s team of legal writers and attorneys<\/a> and in accordance with our editorial standards<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n\n

\n \n <\/i>\n Fact-Checked\n <\/summary>\n\n
\n

The last updated date refers to the last time this article was reviewed by FindLaw or one of our contributing authors<\/a>. We make every effort to keep our articles updated. For information regarding a specific legal issue affecting you, please contact an attorney in your area<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n<\/section>\n\n\n\n

In a decision that is being watched throughout the state, a Nashville trial court has ruled that the existence and amount of insurance coverage in a tort case was relevant, and that the plaintiff had a right to this information. Noting that the issues of relevance and admissability are not co-equal, and that information that is discovable may not be admissable at trial, the court held that this information is particularly useful given the Supreme Court's current focus on alternative dispute resolution, and the fact that the insurance company is the controlling party in the litigation even though it is not a party to the lawsuit. Presently, the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure do not require a defendant to disclose the existence or limits of a policy, although this information is required to be disclosed under Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Sharon Green v. Nashville Otolaryngology Consultants<\/em>, 23 TAM 25-52 (TC Davidson Circuit, 6\/10\/98).

<\/p><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In a decision that is being watched throughout the state, a Nashville trial court has ruled that the existence and amount of insurance coverage in a tort case was relevant, and that the plaintiff had a right to this information. Noting that the …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_stopmodifiedupdate":true,"_modified_date":"","_cloudinary_featured_overwrite":false},"corporate_categories":[6522,6524,6520],"class_list":["post-36612","corporate","type-corporate","status-publish","hentry","corporate_categories-litigation-disputes__civil-litigation","corporate_categories-litigation-disputes__civil-litigation__civil-procedure","corporate_categories-litigation-disputes"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/legal-api\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/corporate\/36612","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/legal-api\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/corporate"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/legal-api\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/corporate"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/legal-api\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36612"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"corporate_categories","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corporate.findlaw.com\/legal-api\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/corporate_categories?post=36612"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}