Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 21STCV35192, Date: 2022-07-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV35192    Hearing Date: July 25, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

1. Background

Plaintiffs Noe Carachure (“Carachure”) and Leslie Cortes (“Cortes”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against defendants Tiffany Sot (“Sot”) and Sam Or for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident.

Plaintiffs attest that defendant Sot has served a subpoena on Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., (“Kaiser”) requesting business records pertaining to both Plaintiffs.  Plaintiffs now move to quash the subject subpoenas served on Kaiser.  The court has not received an opposition. 

2. Motion to Quash

As an initial matter, the court notes that while Plaintiffs assert that Sot served subpoenas requesting any and all records of both Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs submit evidence concerning of only the subpoena pertaining to Cortes.  (Mot. Exh. A.)  Plaintiffs do not submit any evidence of a subpoena served on Kaiser pertaining to Carachure.  Therefore, to the extent Plaintiffs move to quash any subpoena served on Kaiser concerning Carachure, the motion is denied. 

As to the subpoena served on Kaiser pertaining to Cortes, the subpoena demands:

Any and all records of and concerning health insurance, or life insurance and/or disability insurance, including but not limited to, the entire claims file, underwriting file, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE ENTIRE CLAIMS FILE, A COMPLETE COPY OF ANY AND ALL POLICIES INSURING: LESLIE MARIE CORTES AND/OR LESLIE MARIE CARACHURE-CORTES application for insurance records of any physical exams, medical records, medical reports, medical bills, x-ray reports, records re payment of bills, explanation of benefits (EOBs), investigation reports, accident reports, photographs, correspondence, notes and memos.

(Mot. Exh. A.)

Plaintiffs argue the subpoena is overbroad and violates Cortes’s right to privacy.  In particular, Plaintiffs aver the subpoena is not properly limited to the body parts Cortes has put at issue in this action.  Plaintiffs contend the subpoena improperly seeks Cortes’s entire medical history without limitation to time, and thus, seeks information not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.  Plaintiffs attest that the injuries she attributes to the accident are for “Laceration to thumb and shoulder and knee pain. Chronic appearing fracture of the right L1 transverse process.”  (Mot. at p. 4:4-5, Exh. 

Sot does not oppose the motion or otherwise dispute these assertions by Plaintiffs. 

By filing a personal injury action, plaintiffs place in issue their past and present physical and/or mental conditions related to the injury sued upon.  All medical and/or psychological records relating to the claimed injuries are thus discoverable.  Evidence Code §§ 996, 1016; Britt v. Superior Court (1978) 20 Cal.3d 844, 862–864.  Normally, information about medical conditions entirely different from the injury sued upon is beyond the scope of discovery.  However, medical records pertaining to an unrelated condition are discoverable on a showing of “good cause” if the condition is relevant to the issue of proximate causation.  (Evidence Code §999; Slagle v. Superior Court (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1309, 1314–1315 [good cause shown by info that plaintiff was blind 6 months before accident].)

In this case, the subject subpoena demands the entirety of Kaiser’s insurance and medical records relating to Cortes.  This would necessarily include information regarding any treatment Cortes has ever received for any condition she may have had, whether related to injuries she is claiming to have suffered as a result of the accident.  As noted above, there are times when preexisting conditions are of such relevance to the issues presented that evidence relating to these conditions is discoverable.  Sot, however, makes no showing that any preexisting conditions Cortes may have had are directly relevant to injuries claimed in this lawsuit. 

Furthermore, the motion is unopposed and no reason is given as to why Cortes’s complete medical history, without any limitation to time, is discoverable in this action.  Therefore, Sot failed to meet her burden to show that the records she seeks are so relevant as to outweigh Cortes’s right to privacy. 

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs’ motion to quash the subpoena served on Kaiser pertaining to Cortes is granted. 

Plaintiffs further seeks monetary sanctions against Defendant for the motion pursuant to CCP § 2023.010(c).  However, Plaintiffs’ motion fails “in the notice of motion, identify every person, party, and attorney against whom the sanction is sought, and specify the type of sanction sought.”  (CCP § 2023.040.)  Thus, no sanctions are awarded. 

Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice.  If there is an identical subpoena issued as to Carachure the parties are requested to meet and confer about it, taking into account the court’s ruling today, in hopes of avoiding another motion to quash and request for sanctions.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

• Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement.
• If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.  
• Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.  You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.  
• If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave. 

Dated this 25^th day of July 2022