Reilly et al v. Technisource, Inc.

Filing 78

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 41 defendant's Motion to Compel. See attached ruling. Signed by Judge Donna F. Martinez on 7/18/12. (Constantine, A.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
COLLEEN REILLY,

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Plaintiff,
v.
TECHNISOURCE, INC.,
Defendant.

CASE NO. 3:11cv1222(RNC)

RULING ON MOTION TO COMPEL
Pending before the court is the defendant's motion to compel.
(Doc. #41.) After considering the arguments made by the parties in
their papers and during oral argument, the court rules on the
requests as follows:
1.

Interrogatories 6, 7 and Production 42 are granted in

part and denied in part as follows.

For the time period from 2005

to the present, the plaintiff shall provide an index of medical
records

that

identifies

her

healthcare

providers

and

the

institutions at which she received care, the dates of treatment,
and the nature of treatment and/or diagnosis.

The plaintiff's

description of the records shall be sufficiently specific to enable
counsel to have a reasoned discussion as to whether the condition
for which treatment was sought is the type of condition that might
have caused or contributed to the plaintiff's claimed emotional
distress.1

1

In addition, the plaintiff shall specifically identify

For example, a routine physical examination or flu shot is
likely not relevant, but treatment for a very serious disease, such
as cancer, would be relevant.

records that refer to her emotional or psychological condition
and/or symptoms of emotional distress (such as insomnia, loss of
appetite, anxiety).

Counsel shall meet and confer regarding

production of relevant records.

Any subsequent disclosure of

records may be made pursuant to a confidentiality agreement. Under
these

facts,

at

this

juncture

in

the

case,

the

request

for

authorizations is denied.
2.

Interrogatory 8 is denied without prejudice as overbroad.

3.

Production Request 23 is granted insofar as the plaintiff

shall produce copies of those portions of her federal tax returns
for the years after her termination showing the amounts and sources
of her income.
4.

All other information may be redacted.

The defendant's request for an award of sanctions award

of expenses pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A) is denied.
Upon consideration of all of the circumstances, the court has
determined that an award of costs would be unjust.
SO ORDERED at Hartford, Connecticut this 18th day of July,
2012.
___________/s/________________
Donna F. Martinez
United States Magistrate Judge

2