Tentative Rulings

Case Number: ****5190    Hearing Date: January 21, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Richard Allen Root (“Plaintiff”) filed this action following a motor vehicle collision with Defendant Keenan and Karl Kurdi (“Defendants”). Plaintiff alleges that he became immobilized as a result of the accident. Plaintiff also alleges that he “developed severe depression, anxiety and insomnia” as a result of these physical injuries, as well as neurological injuries, “mild cerebral white matter disease, which could result from an imbalance and problems with mobility.” (Plaintiff’s Motion, at p. 4:11.) Therefore, Defendants issued a subpoena for medical records from Aurora Charter Oak Hospital (a mental health care center) and Plaintiff’s psychiatrist, Nageswara R. Guntupall, M.D. Plaintiff moves to quash those subpoenas, which Defendants oppose. The motion is denied.

LEGAL STANDARD

If a subpoena requires the production of documents, the court may quash the subpoena entirely or modify it. (Code Civ. Proc., ; 1987.1, subd. (a).) In ruling on a motion to quash, “the court may in its discretion award the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred in making or opposing the motion, including reasonable attorney's fees, if the court finds the motion was made or opposed in bad faith or without substantial justification or that one or more of the requirements of the subpoena was oppressive.” (Code Civ. Proc., ; 1987.2, subd. (a).)

DISCUSSION

A plaintiff who seeks to recover for personal injuries waives the physician-patient privilege to some extent, but does not waive the privilege with respect to the plaintiff’s lifetime medical history. (Britt v. Superior Court (1978) 20 Cal.3d 844, 863-864.) Plaintiff has put his mental and neurological health at issue in this litigation by alleging severe depression, anxiety, insomnia, and cerebral disease stemming from physical injuries suffered in the accident. Defendants are entitled to Plaintiff’s mental health and neurological records to confirm or refute those allegations. The Court does not believe the time frame is too broad, because the subpoenas seek records for the past ten years, and the accident occurred on September 18, 2015.

The Court declines to award sanctions. The Court concludes that the parties had a good faith dispute as to the proper scope of the subpoenas, and that neither party has acted in bad faith.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff’s motion to quash is denied. Plaintiff shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: January 21, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court