In the past, the rules of discovery were very restrictive, and trials often turned on elements of surprise. For example, a plaintiff would not necessarily know until the trial what the defendant's defense was going to be. In the last several decades, however, new rules of discovery have substantially changed this situation. Now, each attorney can access practically all of the evidence that the other side intends to present at trial, with the exception of certain information - namely, the opposing attorney's work product. Work product is not a precise concept. Basically, it includes all of the attorney's thoughts on the case. Required:
Can you see any reasons why such information should not be made available to the opposing attorney?