After the Creek Fire, SoCal Edison’s law department directed an investigation, conducted mostly by non-lawyer claims department personnel, of SoCal Edison’s possible role in causing the fire.  In later litigation, insurers of burnt homes sought production of emails between the claims department personnel and in-house experts or other witnesses sent as part of the internal investigation.  This decision holds that all of the documents were entitled to at least qualified work product privilege.  Though in other investigations, the claims department personnel may have acted independently, in this one, they acted at the direction and as agents of SoCal Edison’s attorneys.  Also, it does not matter that SoCal Edison is required to report to the PUC about its possible involvement in causing the fire.  A client still needs a lawyer’s help in determining whether it is required to make a public report and if so to advise regarding the report’s contents.