Aplaintiff filed a negligence action against a defendant in federal district court after a two-car accident. the plaintiff's attorney created a list of everyone he could identify who observed the accident or otherwise had information relevant to the accident. the list includes one eyewitness whom the plaintiff's attorney was able to identify only through the expenditure of several thousand dollars in investigation costs. the defendant served the following interrogatory on the plaintiff: " state the name of each person of whom you are aware who may know or have information relevant to this action."

must the plaintiff provide the defendant with the names of all of the people on the plaintiff's attorney's list?

a. no, because the names on the list are protected from discovery under the work product doctrine.
b. no as to the name of the eyewitness found through the plaintiff's investigation efforts, but yes as to the other names on the list.
c. yes, because, whil the names are subject to qualified immunity from discovery under the work product doctrine, the defendant will be able to show sufficient need to obtain a court order requiring the names' disclosure.
d. yes, because the names are relevant to the claims and defenses of the parties, and they do not constitute work product.

Does this sound good? hey great britain, we need to talk. we’ve been through a lot these past couple of years and i don’t think that i would’ve made it this far without you but, i think it’s time that i tried to. don’t get me wrong, i think you’re a pretty great country! you’re smart, you’re funny, you're rich, and very dominant but, these past couple of years you’ve been a little too dominant. as each year goes by you become more and more self-absorbed. you’re only concerned about your own well-being. for example, when we get into arguments you always raise the taxes on paper and tea prices; it just isn’t fair. not only are you selfish but, you always want your buddies around. it’s not very fun cleaning up after you and your british soldiers (you guys never put the toilet seat down). they’re always popping up unexpected, and you always force me to let them stay for a couple of days. not to mention how irresponsible you are. i don’t like it when you force some of your responsibility on me. it’s not my fault that you got yourself into another war so, why should i have to pay for it? listen, in the beginning, what we had was good but, you and i aren’t so compatible anymore. i think it’s best if i took some time to be independent and think for myself for once. -yours truly, the states

What words in the preamble to the constitution reflect the principle of popular sovereignty

Which regulatory agency attempts to prevent unfair business practices and consumer fraud?