11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 25a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Videotape of compulsory physical examination — Plaintiff’s use of his privacy rights as grounds to prevent production of video of physical examination is not persuasive where plaintiff requested intrusion into his privacy by requesting presence of videographer at exam — Privilege — Work product — Video of examination is not akin to a surveillance video taken of personal injury claimant by insurer where video is not result of clandestine unilateral investigation, but was created by permission of the court to benefit both parties by avoiding additional disputes — Even if video were work product, circumstances would warrant its production where there is no suggestion that video contains mental impressions, conclusions, opinions or legal theories of counsel or that review of tape would disclose strategic, confidential or privileged information, there is no indication that any prejudice would inure to plaintiff if tape was made available to insurer, and insurer cannot obtain precise record of physical exam in any other fashion