Prompts, privilege & discovery
Villanueva v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
The court required disclosure of an expert’s ChatGPT-generated case summaries but protected his prompts, deposition preparation, and draft-report material.
Expert AI log partly discoverable01
Case background
Material facts
In a detention-related civil rights action, expert Tom Melton used ChatGPT to research and draft his report. The magistrate judge ordered production of his entire history log. The plaintiff objected.
02
The decision
The court’s ruling
Judge Anne R. Traum partly sustained the objection. Case summaries Melton considered were disclosable facts or data under Rule 26(a)(2)(B)(ii). His prompts revealed mental impressions and theories; deposition outlines and draft-report material were also protected under Rule 26’s trial-preparation and expert-draft provisions. The court found no waiver through his use of ChatGPT as a research, drafting, and editing application.
Why it matters
What the decision means
Review an expert’s AI history by function. Research outputs considered in forming an opinion require separate treatment from protected drafting and preparation.
Limit of the ruling. This district-court discovery order does not establish blanket protection for AI conversations or approve the expert’s methodology. The court identified impeachment at trial as an avenue for challenging his AI reliance. The AI analysis appears at pages 3–11.
Primary reading