Judge Christian R. Gullon, Case Number: 23PSCP00171, Date: 2023-07-12 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Christian R. Gullon, Case: 23PSCP00171, Date: 2023-07-12 Tentative Ruling

Defendant CONNECT, POWERED BY AMERICAN FAMILY INSURANCE’s Motion to Compel is TBD.

On April 12, 2023, Respondent American Family Insurance Company (“Respondent” or “Defendant”) Filed A Petition To Enforce Discovery [Ins. C. §11580.2(F)] And Request For Assignment Of A Case Number wherein Sarah Beltran (“Claimant” or “Plaintiff”) has refused to sign and provide medical treatment record releases and Employment Authorizations to the carrier within 15 days of the insurer’s request as required by Insurance Code, §11580.2(o).

“If an insured has failed to provide an insurer with wage loss information or medical treatment record releases within 15 days of the insurer's request or has failed to submit to a medical examination arranged by the insurer within 20 days of the insurer's request, the insurer may, at any time prior to 30 days before the actual arbitration proceedings commence, request and the insured shall furnish, wage loss information or medical treatment record releases, and the insurer may require the insured, except during periods of hospitalization, to make himself or herself available for a medical examination. The wage loss information or medical treatment record releases shall be submitted by the insured within 10 days of request and the medical examination shall be arranged by the insurer no sooner than 10 days after request unless the insured agrees to an earlier examination date, and not later than 20 days after the request. If the insured fails to comply with the requirements of this subdivision, the actual arbitration proceedings shall be stayed for at least 30 days following compliance by the insured. The proceedings shall be scheduled as soon as practicable following the expiration of the 30-day period.” (See Cal. Ins. Code § 11580.2(o).)

As explained by Defendant, Plaintiff is required pursuant to the insurance contract to respond to provide signed authorizations as she is claiming a lost wage claim ($21,000) in addition to physical injuries and claimed medical expenses that she attributes to the accident. (See Motion p. 4, citing to Insurance Policy [“A person seeking coverage must: a. Cooperate with us in the investigation, settlement or defense of any claim or suit. *** d. Authorize us to obtain medical reports and other pertinent records.”].) Respondent has requested that Plaintiff sign the requested wage loss and medical authorizations. Undersigned counsel has made multiple attempts to informally resolve this discovery dispute without involving the Court. In fact, the Arbitrator offered to informally discuss and potentially resolve the dispute, but Plaintiff’s Counsel refused to allow the Arbitrator to decide discovery. (Motion p. 2, citing Ex. 4.) Therefore, Respondent Counsel’s attempts at informal resolution have been rejected by Plaintiff.

Here, however, the email exchanges between the parties does not corroborate Defendant’s narration that Plaintiff’s Counsel has outright refused to comply with discovery. (See Motion, Ex. 2, p. 25 of 79 of PDF [Email from Plaintiff [“My client provided signed medical authorizations to you months ago in September, 2022. My client testified in her deposition, that you took, that she recovered from the injuries sustained in the automobile accident in 2018 and was pain free for six months prior to the 2019 auto accident. It is abundantly clear that American Family Insurance is simply engaging in bad faith by continually delaying and denying and unnecessarily prolonging my clients claim.”]; see also Motion, Ex. 4 [Email sent on 2-23-23 (“Plaintiff is agreeable to proceeding with scheduling the arbitration.”)].)

Based on the foregoing, though the court has the authority to adjudicate the matter,[1] the matter will be TBD at the hearing, as will the issue of monetary sanctions.[2]

[1] (See Motion p. 5, citing Miranda v. 21st Century Ins. Co. (2004) 117 Cal. App. 4th 913, 926 [“We conclude the court had the power to rule on the discovery dispute. And because we conclude the Legislature could not have intended the arbitrator and the court to possess concurrent power, the uninsured motorist law grants the superior court the exclusive jurisdiction to hear discovery matters arising under uninsured motorist arbitrations. Invested with the exclusive power to rule, and because the uninsured motorist statute makes available “all rights, remedies, obligations, liabilities and procedures set forth in [the Civil Discovery Act]” (§ 11580.2, subd. (f)), the court necessarily had the power to dismiss the case as a terminating sanction.”].)

[2] As for Defendant’s request for monetary sanctions against Plaintiff and/or its counsel pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2023.010 et seq., and 2023.030, Defendant has not provided the amount of sanctions sought. That said, if the motion is granted—utilizing a Lodestar approach, and in view of the totality of the circumstances—the court determines that the total and reasonable amount of attorney’s fees and costs incurred for the work performed in connection with the pending motion is $600 ($200/hour for 3 hours). Sanctions would be payable within 20 days of the date of the hearing.