Catanzaro v. Carr et al

Filing 74

ORDER granting 64 Motion to Compel Discovery - Signed by Magistrate Judge Mona K. Majzoub. (LBar)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MATTHEW CATANZARO,
Plaintiff,
vs.
CARR, et al.,

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-CV-14554
DISTRICT JUDGE NANCY G. EDMUNDS
MAGISTRATE JUDGE MONA K. MAJZOUB

Defendants.
___________________________________________/
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT MARBLE’S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
(DOCKET NO. 64)
This matter comes before the Court on the Motion to Compel Discovery filed by Defendant
Dianna Marble. (Docket no. 64). Plaintiff filed a response to the motion. (Docket no. 66).
Defendant Marble filed a reply. (Docket no. 67). All pretrial matters have been referred to the
undersigned for action. (Docket no. 10). The Court dispenses with oral argument on the motion
pursuant to E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(f). The motion is now ready for ruling pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(A).
Plaintiff Matthew Catanzaro, a state inmate currently incarcerated at the Pugsley
Correctional Facility in Kingsley, Michigan, filed this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. The events giving rise to Plaintiff’s complaint occurred while he was incarcerated at the
Mid-Michigan Correctional Facility in St. Louis, Michigan.

Defendant Marble is a Nurse

Practitioner who was employed at the Mid-Michigan Correctional Facility at the time of the events
giving rise to Plaintiff’s complaint. Plaintiff sues Defendant Marble in her individual capacity,
alleging claims of retaliation and deliberate indifference to his medical needs. (Docket no. 1).

1

On May 9, 2011 Defendant Marble served her First Request for Production of Documents
asking Plaintiff to complete an attached medical release authorization so that she could obtain
Plaintiff’s medical records. (Docket no. 64, ex. A). Plaintiff objected to the request in writing,
claiming that the medical authorization was too broad because it included a request for Plaintiff’s
mental health records. (Docket no. 64, ex. B). In response to Plaintiff’s objections, Defendant
Marble served a second medical release authorization which requested all of Plaintiff’s medical
records other than psychiatric records. (Docket no. 64, ex. C). Defendant refused to sign the second
authorization as well, claiming that Defendant Marble does not have a right to review his medical
file and arguing that his date of birth on the authorization is inaccurate. (Docket no. 64, ex. D). In
response to the present motion, Plaintiff now argues that the medical authorization identifies the
wrong date of birth and is too broad by asking for medical records from 2000 through 2011.
(Docket no. 66).
Plaintiff has placed his medical condition at issue in this case by alleging that Defendant
Marble was deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. Consequently, Plaintiff’s medical records
are relevant to the claims in this case and are discoverable under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
26(b). Plaintiff must allow Defendant Marble to obtain his medical file. Plaintiff’s allegations
against Defendant Marble relate to the years 2008 and 2009. However, Plaintiff claims that he
received Ditropan for more than two years before Defendant Marble allegedly refused to renew his
prescription. (Docket no. 1, ¶ 140).
The Court will grant Defendant Marble’s motion, and will order Defendant Marble to serve
Plaintiff with a new medical authorization form requesting any and all medical records including
electronic records from 2007 through 2010, excluding psychiatric records.

2

The medical

authorization should identify Plaintiff’s date of birth as March 18, 1966, as is shown on the Offender
Tracking Information System. Plaintiff will be ordered to sign the medical authorization without
further objection and return it to Defendant Marble.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant Marble’s Motion to Compel Discovery
(docket no. 64) is GRANTED as follows:
A.

On or before September 9, 2011 Defendant Marble must serve Plaintiff with a new
medical authorization form identifying Plaintiff’s date of birth as March 18, 1966
and requesting any and all medical records including electronic records from 2007
through 2010, excluding psychiatric records.

B.

Plaintiff must sign the medical authorization without further objection and return it
to Defendant Marble by September 23, 2011. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with
this order may result in dismissal of some or all of his claims against Defendant
Marble.

C.

Defendant Marble’s request for costs is denied.
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), the parties have a period of fourteen days from the date
of this Order within which to file any written appeal to the District Judge as may be permissible
under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1).
Dated: September 1, 2011

s/ Mona K. Majzoub
MONA K. MAJZOUB
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3

PROOF OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of this Order was served upon Matthew Catanzaro and
Counsel of Record on this date.
Dated: September 1, 2011

s/ Lisa C. Bartlett
Case Manager

4