Enwere v. Terman Apartments, LP et al
INTERIM ORDER re 105 Defendant's Motion to Compel. Signed by Judge Patricia V. Trumbull on 10/15/08. (pvtlc1) (Filed on 10/15/2008)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On October 14, 2008, Defendants filed a motion to compel Plaintiff to 1) produce documents and 2) authorize production of health information from a third party. Having reviewed the papers submitted by the parties, the court finds it appropriate to issue this interim order denying the latter portion of Defendants' motion and leaving the former portion of the motion on for hearing on November 25, 2008. Based on the moving papers and the file herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' motion to compel Plaintiff to execute and return the release requested by the San Mateo Department of Health is DENIED without prejudice to Defendants moving for an order compelling the San Mateo Department of Health to comply with any valid subpoena Defendants serves on it. Defendant cites no legal authority by which the court may order a litigant to execute a release for her medical records. The proper procedure is to move to OR D E R, page 1 CATHY ENWERE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) TERMAN ASSOCIATES, L.P., dba ) TERMAN APARTMENTS, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ___________________________________ ) Case No.: C 07-1239 JF (PVT) INTERIM ORDER RE DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
compel the health provider to comply with any valid subpoena with which it has been served.1 See, FE D .R.CIV .PR O . 45(c)(2)(B)(i). In the present case, the subpoena Defendants served on San Mateo Department of Health is invalid because it was not issued by the court for the district where the production was set to occur.2 See FED.R.CIV.PRO. 45(a)(2)(C) (subpoena for production of documents must issue "from the court for the district where the production or inspection is to be made.") IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the portion of Defendants' motion that seeks an order compelling Plaintiff herself to produce documents remains on calendar for November 25, 2008, and Plaintiff's opposition to that portion of the motion remains due on November 4, 2008. Dated: 10/15/08 PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL United States Magistrate Judge
The court deems the July 1, 2008 letter from the County of San Mateo Health Department to be an objection on grounds of Plaintiff's privacy, California Welfare and Institutions Code section 5328, and California Evidence Code section 1013(c). The court expresses no opinion at this time as to the validity of any such objections in this case. Even if the subpoena had issued from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, where the production was set to occur, it would be subject to being quashed because it requires the subpoenaed party to travel more than 100 miles to produce the documents. See Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 45(c)(3)(A)(ii). OR D E R, page 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 OR D E R, page 3 /s/ Donna Kirchner CORINNE LEW Courtroom Deputy for copies mailed on 10/15/08 to: Cathy Enwere 1263 Madera Ave. Menlo Park, CA 94025 Counsel automatically notified of this filing via the court's Electronic Case Filing system.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?