JORDAN v. STR TRANSPORT INC et al
ORDER granting 29 Motion to Amend Complaint; granting in part and denying in part 19 Motion to Quash. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE C ASHLEY ROYAL on 10/18/2016 (lap)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
TYSHONDA M. JORDAN,
STR TRANSPORT, INC., and CHRIS :
ORDER ON MOTION TO QUASH PORTIONS OF SUBPOENA
Before the Court is Plaintiff Tyshonda Jordan’s Motion to Quash portions of
Defendants’ subpoena to produce documents from the Pathways Center based on
Georgia’s mental health privilege. On June 24, 2016, the Court entered an Order finding
the requested documents discoverable to the extent they do not contain privileged
communications.1 The Court, however, deferred ruling on the Motion and directed
Plaintiff’s counsel to highlight the portions Plaintiff believes are privileged and submit
the documents for an in camera review.
The Court has conducted its in camera review and finds the highlighted portions
of the submitted documents are privileged communications under Georgia law.2
See O.C.G.A. § 24‐5‐501(a). See also Cooksey v. Landry, 295 Ga. 430, 432‐33 (2014) (noting
“[c]ommunications between certain mental health providers, including communications between
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash [Doc. 19] is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART. As set forth in the previous Order, the Motion is DENIED as to all
non‐privileged portions of the documents. The Motion to Quash is GRANTED as to all
the portions highlighted by Plaintiff.
Also before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Amend Answers. Defendants
STR Transport, Inc. and Chris Jin Lee seek leave to file Amended Answers pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2). Plaintiff has consented in writing to the
proposed amendments. Thus, Defendants’ Motion [Doc. 29] is GRANTED.
SO ORDERED, this 18th day of October, 2016.
S/ C. Ashley Royal
C. ASHLEY ROYAL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
psychiatrists and patients, are . . . protected from disclosure”).
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?