Judge: James A. Mangione, Case: 37-2020-00020795-CU-PO-CTL, Date: 2024-06-28 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - June 27, 2024

06/28/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-75 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:James A Mangione

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  PI/PD/WD - Other Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2020-00020795-CU-PO-CTL ALAMEDDIN VS THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Defendant's Motion to limit production of raw data to the parties' respective neuropsychological experts is granted. Plaintiff's request for disclosure of raw data to Plaintiff's counsel is denied without prejudice.

Plaintiff's alternative request striking Delis as defense expert is also denied.

A trial court has the discretion to require the production of a neuropsychological exam raw data to counsel, subject to a proper protective order, upon a showing of legitimate need. (Randy's Trucking, Inc.

v. Superior Court of Kern County (2023) 91 Cal.App.5th 818, 848.) The court in Randy's Trucking concluded that the plaintiff had demonstrated a legitimate need for disclosure of the raw psychological data because he had not retained an expert witness in the case. As such, the plaintiff would be forced to pay for the services of an expert specifically to obtain the underlying data or be precluded from reviewing it entirely.

Here, Plaintiff has already retained the services of an expert in the field of neuropsychology. Unlike Randy's Trucking, Plaintiff is not being forced to incur additional costs or prevented from reviewing the raw data. Therefore, Plaintiff has not demonstrated a legitimate need for disclosure to Plaintiff's counsel of raw data from Plaintiff's neuropsychological examination. Therefore, the Court need not address the proper scope of any proposed protective order.

The minute order is the order of the Court.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3124275  5