e in such a situation than if the statements were not provoked." Sack at § 9.2.1; Reynolds v. Pegler 223 F.2d 429, 433 (2d Cir. 1955); Konikoff v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. 1999 WL 688460, at *12 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 1, 1999), aff'd 1234 F.3d 92 (2d Cir. 2000). Although defendants are not required to "follow Marquis

bbs, 795 So. 2d 1038, 1039 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). The party asserting the privilege must prove that the materials constitute work product. See, e.g., Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. Fla. Dep't of Ins., 694 So. 2d 771, 773-74 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (objecting party provided affidavits stating that the documents were prepar

ovides that a rate filed with and approved by a governing regulatory agency is unassailable in judicial proceedings brought by ratepayers." Clark v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 736 F. Supp. 2d 902, 913 (D.N.J. 2010) (citing Alston v. Countrywide Fin. Corp., 585 F.3d 753, 763 (3d Cir. 2009)). Specifically, "[t]he f