Judge Joel L. Lofton, Case Number: 23AHCV01254, Date: 2024-06-26 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Joel L. Lofton, Case: 23AHCV01254, Date: 2024-06-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23AHCV01254 Hearing Date: June 26, 2024 Dept: X

Tentative Ruling

Judge Joel L. Lofton, Department X

HEARING DATE: June 26, 2024 TRIAL DATE: February 18, 2025

CASE: Osbaldo Iniguez v. Pest Innovations, et al.

CASE NO.: 23AHCV01254

MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT TO PRODUCE DEFENSE MEDICAL EXAMINATION REPORT OF PLAINTIFF

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Osbaldo Iniguez

RESPONDING PARTY: None

SERVICE: March 21, 2024

OPPOSITION: None

REPLY: None

RELIEF REQUESTED

Plaintiff Osbaldo Iniguez moves for an order compelling Defendant Pest Innovations, Inc. to provide Dr. Tony Feuerman’s full defense medical examination report regarding his examination of Plaintiff Osbaldo Iniquez on January 29, 2024 and that Defendant Pest Innovations, Inc. pay sanctions in an amount no less than $2,060.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Osbaldo Iniguez (“Plaintiff”) commenced this action on June 2, 2023 by filing his Complaint against Defendants Pest Innovations, Inc. (“Pest Innovations”), Peter Alfonso Valderramos, Irene Iglesias (collectively “Defendants”), and Does 1 to 30, inclusive. The Complaint alleges two causes of action for general negligence and motor vehicle.

Defendants filed their Answer on July 5, 2023.

On January 29, 2024, Defendant Pest Innovation’s doctor, Dr. Tony Feuerman (“Dr. Feuerman”), examined Plaintiff. (Declaration of Greg A. Jackson (“Jackson Decl.”) ¶ 5.) On February 20, 2024, Defense counsel provided a copy of Dr. Feuerman’s report regarding the medical examination. (Id. at ¶ 6; Ex. “C.”) On March 1, 2024, Defense counsel provided a copy of Dr. Feuerman’s supplemental record review. (Id.) Plaintiff’s counsel attempted to meet and confer with Defense counsel seeking a code compliant report from Dr. Feuerman. (Id. at ¶¶ 7-9; Ex. “D.”)

On March 21, 2024, Plaintiff filed the instant motion to compel Defendant Pest Innovation to produce the medical examination report of Plaintiff. Plaintiff requests sanctions in connection with the motion. No opposition has been filed.

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff’s motion to compel is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to provide a code compliant medical examination report regarding the examination of Plaintiff on January 29, 2024 within 30 days of this order.

Plaintiff’s request for sanctions against Defendant and its counsel of record is GRANTED in the sum of $1,560. Defendant and its counsel of record are ordered to pay this amount within 30 days of this order.

MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENSE MEDICAL EXAMINATION REPORT

A. Meet and Confer

A motion for an order compelling delivery of medical reports shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2032.650.) A meet and confer declaration in support of a motion shall state facts showing a reasonable and good faith attempt at an informal resolution of each issue presented by the motion. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2016.040.)

B. Legal Standard

Code of Civil Procedure § 2032.610 provides:

(a) If a party submits to, or produces another for, a physical or mental examination in compliance with a demand under Article 2 (commencing with Section 2032.210), an order of court under Article 3 (commencing with Section 2032.310), or an agreement under Section 2016.030, that party has the option of making a written demand that the party at whose instance the examination was made deliver both of the following to the demanding party:

(1) A copy of a detailed written report setting out the history, examinations, findings, including the results of all tests made, diagnoses, prognoses, and conclusions of the examiner.

(2) A copy of reports of all earlier examinations of the same condition of the examinee made by that or any other examiner.

(b) If the option under subdivision (a) is exercised, a copy of the requested reports shall be delivered within 30 days after service of the demand, or within 15 days of trial, whichever is earlier.

“If the party at whose instance an examination was made fails to make a timely delivery of the reports demanded under Section 2032.610, the demanding party may move for an order compelling their delivery. This motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 2032.620(a).)

“The court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel delivery of medical reports under this section, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 2032.620(b).) Sanctions may be awarded even though no opposition to the motion was filed, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed. (CRC Rule 3.1348(a).)

DISCUSSION

As a preliminary matter, the Court finds Plaintiff has met his meet and confer obligations. (Jackson Decl., ¶¶ 7-9; Ex. “D.”)

Plaintiff argues the motion should be granted because neither the initial report nor the supplemental report provided by Dr. Feuerman complies with Code of Civil procedure § 2032.610(a)(1) because neither reports contains “diagnoses, prognoses, or conclusions.” Upon review of the subject reports attached as Exhibit C to the Declaration of Jackson, the Court agrees. The reports set forth Dr. Feuerman’s review of Plaintiff’s current symptoms, his review of Plaintiff’s medical records, and a history of Plaintiff’s symptoms and treatment from the subject incident. The reports do not contain any diagnoses, prognoses, or conclusion. If Dr. Feuerman had none, then such should be clearly reflected. Therefore, the unopposed motion is granted.

In connection with the motion, Plaintiff requests sanctions against Defendant and/or the attorney in the sum of $2,060, representing 4 hours incurred at the hourly rate of $500, plus $60 filing fee. (Jackson Decl., ¶ 11.) Because the motion is unopposed and therefore no reply was necessary, the request for sanctions is granted in the reduced amount of $1,560 for 3 hours incurred at the hourly rate of $500, plus $60 filing fee.

CONCLUSION

Moving Party to provide notice.

Dated: June 26, 2024 ___________________________________

Joel L. Lofton

Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court indicating their

intention to submit. alhdeptx@lacourt.org