Judge: John J. Kralik, Case: 23BBCV01345, Date: 2024-02-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23BBCV01345    Hearing Date: February 9, 2024    Dept: NCB

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

North Central District

Department B

BACKGROUND

A.   Allegations

Plaintiff Sako Shahbazian (“Plaintiff”) alleges that on July 21, 2021, he came to a complete stop for traffic ahead at the intersection of Foothill Blvd. and Oro Vista Avenue when Defendant Rooben Markarian’s (“Markarian”) negligence and unsafe speed caused Defendants’ vehicle to rear-end Plaintiff’s vehicle.  Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Nune Hartunyan (“Hartunyan”) is the person who employed Markarian, the operator of the vehicle. 

The complaint, filed April 13, 2023, alleges causes of action for: (1) motor vehicle; and (2) general negligence.

B.    Motion on Calendar

On January 8, 2024, Plaintiff filed a motion to quash subpoenas.

The Court is not in receipt of an opposition brief. On February 1, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice of non-opposition stating that he is not in receipt of an opposition brief.

DISCUSSION

         Plaintiff moves to quash the deposition subpoenas for production of business records dated December 7, 2023 served on Progressive Group of Insurance Companies (“Progressive”) and Travelers Property Casualty Company of America (“Travelers”) on the grounds that the subpoenas seek information that violate Plaintiff’s right to privacy in his medical records beyond the injuries, conditions, and body parts at issue in this case; the subpoenas violate the physician-patient privilege and/or psychotherapist-patient privilege; they violate his right of privacy in his financial information; they are overly broad in scope and time; they violate the collateral source rule; and they fail to comply with the timing and notice requirements.  Alternatively, Plaintiff requests that the order limit the subpoenas to the relevant body parts at issue as identified by Plaintiff in FROG No. 6.2. 

          The subpoenas issued on Progressive seeks all demand letters, medical records, medical billing, automobile estimates, automobile damage photographs, payments, related to a claim made by Plaintiff to Progressive’s Policy No. 62604656005: (a) Claim Nos. 0120175230259 and 174230259 arising out of an auto accident that occurred on June 10, 2017 involving a 2016 Volkswagen Passat owned by Katie Drohner and 1992 Jeep Wrangler driven by Plaintiff; (b) Claim No. 0120175763506 arising out of an auto accident that occurred on November 18, 2017 involving a 2015 Mini Cooper; (c) Claim No. 0120172744728 arising out of an automobile accident that occurred on August 21, 2017 involving a 2014 Honda Civic; (d) Claim No. 0120192339926 arising out of an automobile accident that occurred on June 14, 2019 involving a 2005 BMW M3; (e) Claim No. 0120172622159 arising out of an automobile accident that occurred on April 29, 2017 involving 1992 Jeep Wrangler; and (f) Claim No. 0120172929833 arising out of an automobile accident that occurred on June 8, 2017 involving a 2017 Mini and 2017 Chevrolet Silverado. (Mot., Ex. 1.)  The subpoena issued on Travelers seeks all medical reports, medical billing, imaging, medical records, chart notes, evidence of payments of workers compensation benefits and correspondence related to the Claim No. FRN8717001, Defendant’s worker’s compensation claim while working for Carmax Inc.  (Id.)  Plaintiff served an objection to the subpoenas.  (Id., Ex. 2.) 

While a plaintiff is not obligated to sacrifice all privacy to seek redress for a specific physical, mental, or emotional injury, “they may not withhold information which relates to any physical or mental condition which they have put in issue by bringing this lawsuit.”  (Britt v. Superior Court (1978) 20 Cal.3d 844, 864; City & County of San Francisco v. Superior Court (1951) 37 Cal.2d 227, 232.)  A plaintiff suing for personal injuries waives the physician-patient privilege to some extent, but this does not make discoverable all of a plaintiff’s lifetime medical history.  (Britt, supra, 20 Cal.3d at 863-64.)    

Here, the information sought in the subpoenas seek information about other accidents that Plaintiff was involved in from 2017 to 2019, which may be relevant to this action as the information may show whether Plaintiff’s injuries in this action were preexisting conditions from prior accidents.  The Court will allow the discovery of the information subject to the limitation that a file/document that does not implicate any of the body parts injured in this action need not be produced. In FROG No. 6.2, Plaintiff listed his injuries to include the mid back, low back radiating to right thigh, bilateral lower extremities, right wrist, tailbone, and head pain.  (Mot. at p.6.)  If there was no allegation of any of these injuries in one of these other incidents, then the filed need not be produced. If Defendants find that more information is needed based on the information produced, they may propound written discovery on Plaintiff or file a motion with the Court to consider. 

The motion to quash the subpoenas is granted in part and denied in part.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

         Plaintiff Sako Shahbazian’s motion to quash the subpoenas is granted in part and denied in part.  Defendants are ordered to re-issue the subpoenas on Progressive Group of Insurance Companies and Travelers Property Casualty Company of America with the limitation that the documents sought be limited to Plaintiff’s injuries related to the mid back, low back radiating to right thigh, bilateral lower extremities, right wrist, tailbone, and head pain.